large_Roary fb profile picture v.2.png

medium_Roary fb profile picture v.2.png

small_Roary fb profile picture v.2.png

thumbnail_Roary fb profile picture v.2.png

Roary fb profile picture v.2.png

large_DIary of an advocate blog post graphic.png

medium_DIary of an advocate blog post graphic.png

small_DIary of an advocate blog post graphic.png

thumbnail_DIary of an advocate blog post graphic.png

DIary of an advocate blog post graphic.png

From lobbying in Geneva to live monitoring in Benin, Uproar's animation 'Diary of an Advocate at the UN' shows the process of advocating for digital rights at the UN.

Uproar Team Publishes Original Animation on UN Advocacy

Keep up to date with all UPR news including past, present and future UPR sessions, what countries and partners we are working with and guest blogs written by collaborators.

Blog

large_Dodo.png

medium_Dodo.png

small_Dodo.png

thumbnail_Dodo.png

Dodo.png

[In a list of ever-growing changes](https://techcrunch.com/2024/06/05/elon-musk-twitter-everything-you-need-to-know/) made to the X platform (formerly known as Twitter), it was recently announced that free audio and video calls are now enabled as a feature to all users via the Direct Messages function on your smartphone app.

At first glance, this sounds like a great idea. What could be better than freely calling any user you follow, anywhere in the world, all from the palm of your hand?

However, online users have pointed out a number of privacy issues with this feature. 

This feature is automatically activated for all X users without notifying, or giving them the ability to opt-in. **This means any follower can call you at any time.**

[Tech experts](https://techcrunch.com/2024/03/04/elon-musk-x-twitter-calling-privacy-switch-off/) discovered that this new feature routes calls through a peer-to-peer network, which exposes both parties’ IP addresses. 

X’s [Help Center](https://help.twitter.com/en/using-x/direct-messages/audio-video-calls) states:
> “The call itself is routed peer-to-peer such that each party's IP address may be visible to the other.”

But you may be wondering what the big deal is – so what if someone can see my IP address? 

## What is an IP address?

An Internet Protocol (IP) address is a string of numbers assigned to your internet-connected device, such as a smartphone or computer. Think of it as the technological equivalent of an address for each of your devices.

Someone knowing your IP address isn’t inherently dangerous but it does make you more susceptible to attacks on privacy. In the wrong hands, it can be used to discover your physical location, Internet Service Provider (ISP) and even your online activity. This also exposes you to risks such as spam and identity theft.

This can be especially dangerous for those who have to protect their existence online, such as human rights activists. This is why the existence of VPNs is a vital tool in online safety, as it can increase your security and privacy by encrypting your connection and masking your IP address.

## How do I protect myself?

To protect your IP address and protect your privacy online, a user needs to access the settings via the X app on your smartphone. (Please note this cannot be accessed via your computer browser so it must be done via the app)

The fastest way is to access your DMs directly via the bottom right corner of the screen, as shown below:

![4.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1719317126/4_01ce8a292b.png)
From there, select the cog thumbnail on the top right corner of the screen

![5.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1719317126/5_d79b59f72f.png)

This will take you directly to the DM settings page

Alternatively, you can access the settings via the following method:

![1.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1719317190/1_f3d5e288a3.png)
![2.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1719317190/2_25da0292ae.png)
![3.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1719317191/3_2e3882d18c.png)
Settings and support > Settings and privacy > Privacy and safety > Direct messages

From the settings page you have two options:

**Disable audio and video calling**

![44.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1719317284/44_f30b7a73a3.png)

If you want to disable the call feature altogether, toggle the ‘enable audio and video calling’ switch to turn it off

**Turn on enhanced privacy**

![33.png](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1719317327/33_81b76c3aeb.png)

If you want to use the new call feature, turn on enhanced privacy to avoid revealing your IP address during calls. 

According to the [X Help centre](https://help.x.com/en/using-x/direct-messages/audio-video-calls):

> “If either party has this setting enabled, a call between the two will be relayed through X infrastructure, and the IP address of any party that has this setting enabled will be masked.”

Although users should be aware that there is no explanation of how the X infrastructure works so it is unclear on how the enhanced privacy protects you, especially as there is no mention of whether the calls are encrypted. If you continue to use this feature, you can take measures such as using a VPN to ensure a more secure connection.

It is “[alarming](https://www.fastcompany.com/91047835/x-twitter-new-calling-feature-privacy-security-flaw-ip-address-scams-stalking)” that this new feature creates such a threat in terms of online privacy, especially when the social media platform is often a key tool for activists and journalists who may be silenced in more ‘traditional’ outlets. 

If users are more aware of the associated risks, users are able to better protect themselves online. 


large_X Call Feature.png

medium_X Call Feature.png

small_X Call Feature.png

thumbnail_X Call Feature.png

X Call Feature.png

Learn how to protect your privacy on X (Twitter)  

How X’s new call feature can lead to attacks on privacy 

thumbnail_aa.png

aa.png

Dans un monde où la défense des droits humains nécessite une approche multifacette, la maîtrise des mécanismes internationaux est essentielle pour promouvoir efficacement les droits fondamentaux. Chaque opportunité doit être saisie pour défendre et promouvoir les droits de l'homme, et l'Examen Périodique Universel (EPU) représente l'une de ces précieuses opportunités. L'EPU peut devenir un puissant outil d'action si l'on comprend ses mécanismes et sa manière d'être exploité dans le plaidoyer. C'est dans cette optique que nous vous présentons quatre cours essentiels conçus pour armer les militants et les défenseurs des droits de l'homme avec les connaissances nécessaires pour tirer pleinement parti de l'EPU et d'autres mécanismes internationaux.

["Introduction à l'examen périodique universel"](https://advocacyassembly.org/fr/courses/48) vous offre un aperçu détaillé du fonctionnement de l'EPU et guide les organisations de la société civile dans leur engagement pour faire progresser les droits de l'homme, y compris les droits numériques. Ce cours couvre les principes fondamentaux de l'EPU, les stratégies d'engagement pour les OSC, ainsi que les forces et les faiblesses de ce processus. Gayatri Khandhadai, une avocate spécialisée dans le droit international et les droits de l'Homme et coordinatrice régionale pour l'Asie à l'APC (Association pour le progrès des communications), sera votre guide.

Un deuxième cours présenté par Gayatri Khandhadai et nos partenaires APC est intitulé ["Créer un impact avec l'EPU".](https://advocacyassembly.org/fr/courses/49) Il s’agit d’un un cours pratique qui vous enseigne comment mettre en œuvre vos connaissances de l'EPU pour influencer le changement et obtenir des résultats concrets en faveur des droits de l'homme. Des conseils pratiques seront dispensés par des experts ayant une expérience directe de l'EPU. Vous apprendrez à rédiger des rapports de synthèse, à dialoguer avec les gouvernements et à façonner efficacement votre agenda.

N'oublions pas que l'EPU se déploie dans le vaste domaine de la diplomatie.

["Diplomatie et EPU pour les défenseurs des droits de l'Homme"](https://advocacyassembly.org/fr/courses/61) est le cours qui vous introduit aux mécanismes de diplomatie liés à l'EPU. Il enseigne aux défenseurs des droits de l'homme comment mobiliser efficacement les parties prenantes pour obtenir des recommandations favorables. Catherine Anite,  avocate spécialisée dans les droits de l'Homme et experte en liberté d'expression et directrice des programmes mondiaux à la Fondation Small Media, vous guidera à travers les processus, les méthodes et les outils nécessaires pour influencer les diplomates et les représentants de l'ONU.

Enfin, ["Recherche sur la législation en matière de droits de l’Homme à des fins de défense"](https://advocacyassembly.org/fr/courses/50) vous apprendra à utiliser efficacement les informations juridiques sur les droits de l'homme pour renforcer vos arguments et mener des actions de plaidoyer informées. Vous explorerez les sources clés de documentation sur les droits de l'homme et apprendrez comment les appliquer dans votre plaidoyer. Ce cours est présenté par Friedhelm Weinberg, directeur exécutif chez HURIDOCS, une organisation basée à Genève qui assiste les défenseurs des droits de l’Homme dans l'utilisation des informations et de la technologie pour mettre en lumière les abus et faire progresser la justice pour les victimes et les auteurs de violations des droits de l’Homme.

Ces quatre cours offrent une opportunité unique d'acquérir des compétences nécessaires et une compréhension approfondie des mécanismes de l'Examen Périodique Universel. En renforçant notre capacité à naviguer dans le paysage complexe de la diplomatie des droits de l'homme, nous sommes mieux équipés pour défendre efficacement les droits fondamentaux et spécialement les droits numériques.

Ne manquez pas cette opportunité pour commencer votre apprentissage et le meilleur, c'est que vous pouvez suivre ces cours gratuitement, à votre propre rythme, en ligne. 

Inscrivez-vous dès aujourd'hui !


large_UPR-french-AA-course-blog-post.png

medium_UPR-french-AA-course-blog-post.png

small_UPR-french-AA-course-blog-post.png

thumbnail_UPR-french-AA-course-blog-post.png

UPR-french-AA-course-blog-post.png

Maximising the Impact of International Mechanisms: explore Uproar's Advocacy Assembly courses on the UPR now translated into French.

Maximiser L'impact Des Mécanismes Internationaux : Explorez Ces Cours Sur L’examen Périodique Universel

Senegal, Nigeria and Mauritius were reviewed at the [45th Universal Periodic Review](https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/upr/upr-sessions) which took place from 22nd January - 2nd February 2024. Uproar and our partners, [Jonction Senegal](http://jonction.e-monsite.com/), [Nigeria Networks of NGOs](https://nnngo.org/) and [Halley Movement](https://halleymovement.org/) in Mauritius worked tirelessly in the lead-up to the review to lobby for digital rights at UPR45. 

> ”We are elated that increasingly, digital rights recommendations are featuring at the UPR. During this session, we received a total of 47 recommendations on freedom of expression, media, information and  privacy rights in general. Of these, twelve were directly touching on internet freedom. Moreso, certain countries are re-echoing Uproar’s recommendations, a testament of the success of our advocacy.“ 
**Catherine Anite, UPRoar’s Director**


# Senegal

Uproar and our partner Jonction Senegal state that Senegal should uphold its international and regional commitments to human rights and refrain from digital rights restrictions and media violations. We put forward the following recommendations on digital rights ahead of its review on 22nd January:

1. Stop the practice of shutting down the internet and blocking social media platforms, and make a state pledge to refrain from imposing any unlawful restrictions on internet access and telecommunication in the future, particularly in upcoming elections and protests.
2. Repeal provisions in the Penal Code, Press Code, Electronic Communications Code and others that arbitrarily interfere with the exercise of free expression, both online and offline.
3. Stop intimidation, harassment, arbitrary arrests and prosecution of journalists, activists and media houses and hold to account those that violate media rights.

[Senegal](https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k11/k115sa2cyi) received **3** recommendations from **3** countries on digital rights and a further **21** recommendations from **19** countries on the issue of freedom of expression:

**Australia** was concerned by excessive use of force against protestors by security personnel as well as restrictions to freedoms of information, expression and peaceful assembly since Senegal's last review including arrests of journalists. 

They made the following two recommendations on the topic of freedom of expression:
1. Uphold the rights to freedom of information, expression and peaceful assembly
2. Investigate cases of excessive use of force by security personnel against protestors and bring perpetrators to account

In regard to future elections, **Belgium** recommended Senegal establish a national law, the press code and the electronic media code to bring it in line with international standards on the right to freedom of expression and to lift prison sentences for dissemination of false news or those offensive to heads of state.

**Brazil** recommended Senegal combat hate speech and violence committed against LGBTQ+ persons.

**Estonia** made 2 recommendations based on freedom of expression:
1. Guarantee universal access to information on sexual and reproductive health in particular for adolescents
2. Amend laws and policies to guarantee freedom of expression, opinion and assembly

**Finland** made a recommendation to bring Senegalese national legislation into line with international norms on freedom of expression and on the safety and protection of journalists.

**Germany** expressed concern about developments concerning freedom of the press. They recommended Senegal strengthen efforts to ensure confidence in the respect of civil and political rights including with regard to freedom of expression and the press.

**Greece** recommended Senegal ensure that journalists enjoy their rights to freedom of expression and that thorough and impartial investigations are conducted in cases of harassment and intimidation.

**Iceland** recommended Senegal Stop and condemn hate speech and incitement against diverse persons and those advocating for their rights.

**Ireland** recommended Senegal ensure the independent investigation of the harassment, intimidation, hate speech and threats against journalists, political opponents and human rights defenders and ensure the prosecution of the perpetrators.

**Kuwait** commended the efforts of Senegal to protect the press in their opening statement and recommended that they continue to promote the national media strategy.

**Lithuania** expressed concern regarding restrictions on freedom of assembly, expression and opinion and therefore recommended Senegal conduct an objective investigation into all allegations of possible excessive use of force in the context of social protests, political gatherings and demonstrations.

**Mexico** recommended Senegal reform Article 279(1) of the Criminal Code so that the notion of terrorist acts should not unduly limit the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and assembly.

The **Netherlands** recommended Senegal align national legislation with international standards on freedom of expression including decriminalisation of press offences.

The **Republic of Korea** recommended Senegal continue efforts to guarantee the rights to freedom of expression and assembly in line with the ICCPR.

**Spain** recommended Senegal decriminalise crimes of defamation, dissemination of fake news and offences against the head of state.

**Palestine** welcomed efforts for a free press by the government including guarantees in Article 10 of the Constitution which grants every person the right to freedom of expression and opinion. They recommended Senegal continue efforts to guarantee individuals and the press the right to freedom of expression.

**Switzerland** made a digital rights recommendation, suggesting Senegal ensure and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression and combat hate speech online and offline.

The **UK** recommended Senegal protect media freedom and the right to freedom of opinion and expression and of peaceful assembly and association including during the 2024 presidential elections.

The **USA** made 2 recommendations, one on digital rights and another on freedom of expression:
1. Ensure peaceful assembly is permitted in the leadup to Senegal's presidential elections
2. Cease limiting internet access and detaining journalists for reporting on political issues

**Uruguay** recommended Senegal take measures to ensure freedom of expression and assembly, ensuring they are in conformity with international and regional human rights commitments.

**Venezuela** made a recommendation on digital rights, suggesting Senegal continue strengthening measures to combat hate speech and disinformation particularly online.

There were also additional countries of note during Senegal’s review. Although they did not make recommendations, they mentioned freedom of expression or digital rights within their opening statements:

**Bhutan** commented that they welcome the adoption of the law on electronic monitoring in Senegal.

**Bulgaria** encouraged Senegal to take appropriate measures to ensure freedom of expression and assembly as well as the protection of journalists.

In response to these recommendations at their 4th cycle review, the Mauritian government asserted: 

> "In Senegal, freedom of expression is practiced, recognised and accepted. No journalist has been prosecuted or convicted for having expressed their opinion in writing or in words. If any journalists have been prosecuted, it is because they have committed crimes under common law and not for expressing their opinion. We are prepared to rapidly implement all the recommendations that Senegal will accept, and we will return with enthusiasm for the 5th cycle, with a leap in the promotion and respect of human rights."
**Minister of Justice, Hon. Aissata Tall Sall**

# Nigeria


Before the review on January 23, Uproar and partner NNNGOs declared that Nigeria should uphold its international obligations to guarantee freedom of expression and access to information on and offline, and refrain from media harassment. The following digital rights recommendations were put forward:

1. Repeal or otherwise amend laws which provide for overboard powers to infringe upon the right to freedom of expression and access to information 
2. Ensure that the internet, including social media and other digital communication platforms including websites, remain open, accessible, and secure across Nigeria (in respect of the ECOWAS Court ruling)
3. End intimidation and harassment of  journalists and others exercising their right to free expression on and offline and hold to account those that violate media rights

[Nigeria](https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1g/k1gxdoom7w) received **3** recommendations from **3** countries on digital rights and a further **6** recommendations from **6** countries on the issue of freedom of expression:

**Belgium** recommended Nigeria end all forms of harassment, intimidation and attacks on journalists and human rights defenders and ensure that all perpetrators are held accountable.

**Colombia** recommended Nigeria combat all forms of restrictions of the civic space and prevent journalists, activists and citizens from being subject to harassment, threats and attacks because of expressing their opinions peacefully.

**Finland** focused on digital rights, recommending Nigeria safeguard independence and pluralism of the media and promote the full realisation of freedom of expression and opinion including on digital platforms.

**Greece** recommended Nigeria intensify efforts to promote freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly by implementing relevant training programs for its officials.

**Italy** recommended Nigeria step up efforts to protect and promote freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly in order to create a safe and favourable environment for human rights defenders, journalists and civil society.

The **Netherlands** expressed concern about violence and impunity affecting the security of civilians and the civic inclusion of media actors and civil society. They recommended Nigeria amend S.24 of the CyberCrime Act as ordered by the ECOWAS Court in 2022 aligning it with regional and international legislation.

**Norway** recommended Nigeria ensure the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and protect press freedom, notably by reviewing proposed bills that prescribe limitations for newsrooms and amending existing broadcasting laws to protect journalists.

**Spain** recommended Nigeria guarantee the rights to freedom of expression and association as well as ensure a safe and conducive environment for HRDs, members of the opposition and journalists.

The **USA** focused on digital rights, making a recommendation to amend Nigeria's Press Council Act of 1992 to remove undue restrictions on freedom of expression specifically as they apply to online and citizen journalists.

A number of additional countries also made mention of digital rights in their opening statement during Nigeria’s review:

**Eswatini** congratulated Nigeria for the significant progress achieved in reinforcing data protection laws through the Data Protection Bill of 2023.

The **Republic of Gambia** commended Nigeria for its significant progress in the technology sector especially in nurturing a dynamic ecosystem and advancing digital technology which positions it as a leading tech hub in Africa.

**Lesotho** was another country that commended Nigeria for enacting the Data Protection Bill of 2023 in their opening remarks.

In response to these recommendations, the Nigerian government reaffirmed its commitment to freedom of assembly, association and press freedom as guaranteed by the constitution.

> "Nigeria remains the bastion of press freedom in Africa. We allow everybody to say whatever they want to say but there must be a dividing line. We will not allow things that divide the country or promote violence in our country. Whatever the court says, we will abide by it because ours is a democracy"
**Hon. Minister of Justice/A.G, Lateef Fagbemi**

The Nigerian government stated that they underscore their dedication to fostering an environment that encourages freedom of expression and opinion as rooted in the firm belief that a society that respects human rights is better positioned for sustainable development and enduring peace. 

# Mauritius

Mauritius’ review was held on January 24. Prior to this, Uproar and partner Halley Movement asserted Mauritius should uphold its international and regional commitments to human rights and aim to improve its digital rights and address media violations. They put forth the following recommendations:

1. Ensure that Mauritius’s legal framework provides adequate protections against unwarranted surveillance and the misuse of personal data, by establishing robust oversight mechanisms and safeguards against surveillance, including independent judicial oversight
2. Review and amend existing legislation, including the Information and Communication Technologies Act  (ICTA) and the Data Protection Act, to ensure they align with international human rights standards
3. End all unwarranted intimidation, harassment and arrests of journalists including the censoring of social media accounts 

Mauritius received **6** recommendations from **6** countries on digital rights and a further **8** recommendations from **7** countries on the issue of freedom of expression:

**Belarus** recommended Mauritius attract additional technical assistance to ensure national potential and capacities to eradicate the negative impacts on cybercrime.

**Belgium** also made a digital rights-focused recommendation, urging Mauritius to put an end to intimidation, harassment and unjustified arrests of journalists including censorship of social media accounts.

**Estonia** expressed concerns about restrictions on freedom of opinion and expression and peaceful assembly in Mauritius and made the following two recommendations:
1. Decriminalise defamation and include it in the civil code in accordance with international standards
2. Ensure the protection of freedom of opinion and expression by reviewing vague and broad offences in the Information and Communication Technologies Act

**Germany** mentioned digital freedom in their opening remarks, stating they remain concerned about infringements on the freedom of expression and on the rights to information and privacy reflected in cases of online surveillance, sanctioning of critical media outlets and detention of journalists. They recommended Mauritius ensure that the Information and Communication Technologies Act is applied in a way that doesn’t infringe on freedom of expression and the right to privacy.

**Ghana** recommended Mauritius ensure efforts to combat racist media coverage and incidents of hate speech and hold perpetrators accountable.

**Iceland** recommended Mauritius investigate all complaints of violence and hate speech against all persons.

**Indonesia** recommended Mauritius intensify efforts to protect children from abuse and exploitation, particularly in a digital environment.

**Latvia** recommended Mauritius promote an enabling, safe and secure environment for journalists and media workers in line with international human rights standards.

The **Netherlands** expressed concern about the protection of human rights defenders and the guarantee of freedom of expression online and offline. They made two recommendations, one of which was verbatim an Uproar digital rights recommendation:
1. Adopt and enact a legal framework to prevent infringement on personal data and unwarranted surveillance and establish independent judicial oversight for it
2. Take measures to protect civic space and ensure freedom of expression and assembly and participation in a democratic debate for independent media and journalists

**Spain** also made two recommendations, one on digital rights and one on freedom of expression:
1. Amend the Information and Technologies Act and the Data Protection Act to bring them in line with international standards on freedom of expression and press freedom
2. Ensure a safe and enabling environment for journalists and human rights defenders

Finally, the **United Republic of Tanzania** made a digital rights-focused recommendation, urging Mauritius to step up measures to tackle challenges related to digitalisation.

Additionally, **India** did not make a recommendation but noted with appreciation the digital Mauritius 2030 plan focusing on digital public infrastructure for inclusive and non-discriminatory digital access announcing digital governance, ICT infrastructure and Cybersecurity and promoting innovation.

In response to these recommendations, with a delegation headed by the Minister of Trade and Foreign Affairs, the government responded accordingly:

> “Freedom of expression is guaranteed under s.12 of the Constitution. Citizens are free to use their internet. The right to privacy on online platforms is protected interalia by the Cybercrime and Cybersecurity Act, the Data Protection Act, and the Information and Communication Technologies Act. Under the existing legal framework, online surveillance may be resorted to only in limited circumstances, provided there is a judicial order to that effect in the context of a criminal investigation.  Mauritius is also working closely with service providers and platforms to deal swiftly with reported cases of abuse. Mauritius is eagerly awaiting the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy who visited the country in November 2023. The observations of the SR highlights the importance Mauritius attaches to this issue and also the fact that securing privacy will always be work in progress especially as technology evolves. This is an issue that must be dealt with both at national and international levels and Mauritius is willing to work in that direction.” 

The efforts of our partners' lobbying, both in Geneva and locally, resulted in a great number of digital rights and freedom of expression-focused recommendations for Senegal, Nigeria and Mauritius at UPR45. 

In light of the government responses from each country, we hope to see these recommendations be taken seriously and implemented in each respective country’s policies ahead of their next reviews.

To keep up to date with our partners' latest work, follow them on social media:

[Jonction Senegal](https://twitter.com/jonctionsenegal)

[Nigeria Network of NGOs](https://twitter.com/nnngo)

[Halley Movement](https://twitter.com/halleymovement)

 
  


large_Nigeria.png

medium_Nigeria.png

small_Nigeria.png

thumbnail_Nigeria.png

Nigeria.png

Fixed Broadband Subscriptions per 100 inhabitants in 2020

Digital rights are at risk in Nigeria and the Nigerian government needs to safeguard free expression for citizens, journalists and civil society organisations online and offline.

Nigeria is Africa's most populous country. Its current population is 211.4 million. It formally transitioned into a democracy on 29 May 1999 with a Constitution that provides for fundamental human rights including the rights to privacy, expression, press, association and assembly. 

There are various threats and gaps with respect to protecting digital rights in Nigeria. Some of them include the provisions of sections 24 and 38 of the Cybercrimes Act that pose threats to online expression and privacy respectively; the provisions of sections 146 and 148 of the Nigerian Communications Act of 2003 that is being used to arbitrary block online content; lack of a comprehensive data protection legislation; various activities of the Nigerian government which includes the arbitrary arrest and harassment of human rights workers, government critics, journalists etc and the recently, the illegal suspension of the social media website, Twitter by the Nigerian government.

Nigeria

We conduct advocacy during the pre-session through direct lobbying to UN member state representatives and support local advocacy events and workshops that amplify the UPR. During the reviews, we amplify the UPR process and the recommendations our partners have drafted through live- monitoring by our local partners and on social media. We then conduct advocacy during the post- UPR period with activities such as training for government officials and events that highlight the recommendations made during the UPR. 

The country clusters are a local working group in each Uproar target country made up of our partner organisations. The clusters are organised by local lead organisations, who then coordinate local civil society and human rights defenders with digital rights expertise to engage in national-level advocacy and campaigning.

A review cycle is a four-and-half-year period within which all UN Member states’ human rights records are reviewed.  Each 4.5-year period is called a UPR cycle. In this section, you can find all recommendations made organised by cycle.

Over a hundred local and international human rights organisations are part of the wider Uproar programme. You can find them listed here.

large_Mauritius.png

medium_Mauritius.png

small_Mauritius.png

thumbnail_Mauritius.png

Mauritius.png

Fixed Broadband Subscriptions per 100 inhabitants in 2017

State and non-state actors need to do more in ensuring more access to information on digital rights protection in Mauritius.

Mauritius is a country in Southern Africa with a population of 1.3 million. There is limited information on digital rights in Mauritius however information on internet use shows that it has a great prospect to improve its digital rights landscape. Mauritius has several private newspapers, television stations, and radio stations in operation. However, journalists who cover sensitive topics may face harassment.

Mauritius

large_Senegal.png

medium_Senegal.png

small_Senegal.png

thumbnail_Senegal.png

Senegal.png

Senegal needs to act beyond performative acceptance of recommendations on digital rights and ensure adequate protection of these rights.

Senegal is a West African country with a population of 17.7 million. Its 2001 Constitution provides for various human rights including the right to freedom of expression, privacy, association, assembly and many others. The Senegalese enjoy a relatively independent and diverse media and free speech, but restrictions and legal threats remain an obstacle. 

Digital rights protection faces a number of challenges in that some of the laws in force infringe on press freedom and digital rights. These laws include provisions of Article 5 and 192 of the Press Code;  Articles 254, 255, and 258 of the Penal Code; and article 28 of the draft Electronic Communications Code. These challenges are also accentuated by inadequate implementation of Law No. 2008-12 of 25 January 2008 on data protection. In addition to this, journalists and voices critical of the government face arrests.

Senegal

large_UPR 45 blog post graphic.png

medium_UPR 45 blog post graphic.png

small_UPR 45 blog post graphic.png

thumbnail_UPR 45 blog post graphic.png

UPR 45 blog post graphic.png

A summary of recommendations made to Senegal, Nigeria and Mauritius during the 45th session of the Universal Periodic Review

The 45th session of the Universal Periodic Review: Digital Rights in Senegal, Nigeria and Mauritius

Burkina Faso and Djibouti were reviewed at the [44th Universal Periodic Review](https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/upr/upr-sessions) that took place over 6 - 17 November 2023. Uproar and its national partners advocated for recommendations to be made for digital rights. In Burkina Faso, we worked with [Centre National de Presse Norbert Zongo](https://cnpress-zongo.org/), one of the leading freedom of expression and media freedom organisations in the country. In Djibouti, we worked with a local consultant who specialises on freedom of expression.  

Continue reading to find out the results of UPR44, and what digital rights successes have been made for these countries. 

> ”We are delighted to see an increase of recommendations on freedom of expression online and off at the UPR. This means UN representatives are understanding that digital rights are human rights. We hope that the recommendations to Burkina Faso and Djibouti are then followed up accordingly by their governments, so we can see real progress in the protection of online spaces and civil liberties."
**Hannah Machlin, Advocacy Manager, Uproar**


# Burkina Faso

Prior to the review on November 6, Uproar and our partner Centre National de Presse Norbert Zongo put forward the following recommendations on digital rights:

1. Create and restore an environment conducive for the exercise of digital rights and freedoms and guarantee access  to the Internet and ICTs by: 
    1. Halting and desisting from any current or future Internet shutdowns and other arbitrary measures limiting Internet access and use, and restore all digital networks, including social media, and broadcast platforms and ensure that any limitation complies with established regional and international standards; 
   2. End the intimidation, harassment, arbitrary arrests and prosecutions of journalists, critics, activists and campaigners who exercise their right to freedom of expression online and offline in accordance with the law;
2. Ensuring the Right to Data Protection and Privacy on the Internet through complying with the government’s commitments to personal data protection and ending all arbitrary surveillance.
3. Repeal provisions of the Penal Code, under Law No. 044-2019/AN and others that arbitrarily interfere with the exercise of free expression, both online and offline. In particular by decriminalising provisions relating to false news and adopting a whistleblower’s protection law
4. Operationalise the access to information law by immediately implementing law N°051-2015/CNT, of August 30, 2015, on access to public information and administrative documents and creating the National Authority for Access to Public Information (ANAIP). Journalists should also be exempt from terrorism charges while conducting their work, especially during information gathering.

[Burkina Faso](https://media.un.org/en/asset/k15/k15c0x3t80) received **16** recommendations on the issue of freedom of expression from **15** different countries with an additional **1** country mentioning freedom of expression in their opening remark:

**Argentina** gave the following 2 recommendations to Burkina Faso: 
1. Guarantee the right to freedom of expression and opinion including the exercise
of freedom of the press, the civic space and participation of civil society
2. Adopt measures designed to guarantee the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons including protections against discrimination & violence, and rights of freedom of expression and association 

**Australia** recommended Burkina Faso repeal laws that inhibit freedom of expression.

**Belgium’s** opening remark stated that they note with concern the increase of a number of measures taken by the authorities over the last few months against freedom of expression. Media, press organisations and human rights defenders play a crucial role in the respect for human rights and we encourage the authorities to take all necessary measures to ensure that they can continue to work in all freedom. However, there was no recommendation made based on their opening statement.

**Canada** recommended Burkina Faso protect the right to freedom of the press, freedom of expression, freedom of association and opinion, whilst ensuring that attacks and threats levelled against journalists and activists are investigated and criminally prosecuted. 

**Czechia** recommended Burkina Faso guarantee the right to freedom of expression and protect journalists and their rights.

**Denmark** stated in their opening that they are gravely concerned by the continued suspension of activities of political parties and CSOs as well as the suspension of certain media and cases of intimidation and attacks on journalists. They recommended Burkina Faso revoke measures impeding on rights to FoE and assembly, and freedom of the press in order to ensure a conducive environment for political parties, CSOs and the free press.

**Germany** stated they were deeply worried about the harassment of Human Rights Defenders, journalists and the LGBTQ+ community in their opening remark. They recommended Burkina Faso refrain from government interventions into the freedom of the press and freedom of expression so citizens can fully enjoy the rights.

**Ireland** stated in their opening that they remain concerned by restrictions on freedom of expression, press freedom and civic space - in particular, reports of intimidation and attacks on journalists and HRDs. They recommended Burkina Faso provide a safe and enabling environment for journalists including by reversing suspensions and expulsions that restrict press freedom.

**Italy** recommended Burkina Faso ensure freedom of expression and media freedom.

**The Netherlands** stated in their opening that they are concerned about the deterioration of the human rights situation in Burkina Faso; they recommended the creation of a safe environment in Burkina Faso by guaranteeing freedom of association and assembly and freedom of expression and freedom of the press.

**Sierra Leone** recommended Burkina Faso promote the full exercise of rights of freedom of expression and assembly including in the context of security measures.

**Spain** recommended Burkina Faso revise existing legislation to more narrowly defined broadly defined defenses which currently limits freedom of the press and freedom of association and so forth.

**Switzerland** highlighted digital rights and recommended Burkina Faso guarantee and protect the right to freedom of expression and freedom of association and they combat the impunity of perpetrators of hate speech both online and offline to call for violence and stigmatisation against groups of the population particularly.

**The UK** recommended Burkina Faso the promotion of an inclusive transition to civilian government by opening up civic space, and promoting and protecting the rights of freedom of expression and assembly and association.

**The US** recommended Burkina Faso repeal portions of the criminal code that violate the right to freedom of expression to ensure journalists and human rights defenders can do their jobs free from fear, harassment or intimidation.

# Djibouti

Prior to their review on November 9, 2023, Uproar recommended that Djibouti should uphold its international and regional commitments to human rights and refrain from restricting digital rights including access to information and media freedom. Uproar and our partners put forward the following recommendations on digital rights:

1. End the harassment, arbitrary arrest, and prosecution of journalists and other activists, and hold to account those that violate media freedom.
2. Repeal all laws that inhibit freedom of expression, media, access to information both on and offline, including article 425 of the Penal Code on criminal defamation and article 78 of the Communication Law criminalising ‘offending’ the president.
3. Immediately end the throttling of the internet and blockage of websites and social media sites and ensure that any restrictions are consistent with fundamental human rights standards.

[Djibouti](https://t.co/glAPXfIMUJ) received **2** recommendations from **2** countries on digital rights and a further **12** recommendations from **12** countries  on the issue of freedom of expression:

**Argentina** recommended Djibouti adopt necessary measures to ensure that the freedom of expression and opinion is in place and guarantee the participation of civil society and political parties in line with international standards.

**Australia’s** opening stated they are concerned with reports of restrictions on freedom of opinion and expression. They recommended Djibouti allow freedom of opinion and expression to enable greater political and civil society participation. 

**Belgium** recommended Djibouti revise law on freedom of communication as well as the criminal code to eliminate any provisions that restrict freedom of expression and association, in particular by decriminalising defamation and by removing restrictions against the establishment of media based on nationality and age.

**Brazil** recommended Djibouti adopt measures to ensure the implementation of the right to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, and freedom of action by political parties, bringing the national legislation into line with international standards.

**Canada** recommended Djibouti ensure freedom of expression and association, peaceful assembly, and protection of all persons of reprisals, particularly journalists and human rights defenders.

**Estonia** recommended Djibouti decriminalise defamation and include it in the civil code. Revise the provisions that unduly restrict the freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of association and peaceful assembly, and ensure that these rights can be exercised freely.

**Germany’s** opening stated they remain concerned about the state of freedom of expression in particular with a view to the freedom of the press, about the absence of a diverse political landscape with genuine opposition parties, and about limited transparency in the election process. They recommended Djibouti guarantee freedom of expression and free work of the press as well as lift all restrictions on political opposition.

**Ireland’s** opening remark stated they remain concerned that the protection of rights facilitating political participation, in particular freedoms of opinion, expression, association, and peaceful assembly continue to be constrained both in law and in practice. They recommended Djibouti ensure that the legal framework providing for the protection of the rights of freedom of opinion and expression, association and peaceful assembly is compatible with international standards, and enables full and free participation in political life.

**Luxembourg** recommended Djibouti review and adapt the legislation governing the freedom of the media in order to bring it in line with international standards.

**Spain** recommended Djibouti fully guarantee the exercise of the freedoms of peaceful assembly, association, expression and of the press, by reforming the 1992 law on the freedom of communication.

**US** gave the following 2 recommendations to Djibouti: 
1. Protect political opposition by allowing all groups to form legally recognised political parties, protect the ability of citizens to criticise the government without fear of harassment,  abuse or detention, and allow unrestricted access to the internet including social media  
2. Guarantee rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly for journalists, human rights defenders and all other persons, this includes a guarantee that they’re not prosecuted, detained or refused entry to the country for exercising these rights 

**Zambia** gave the following 2 recommendations to Djibouti: 
1. Intensify efforts to ensure the guaranteed freedom of expression and media freedom by bringing national legislation into line with international standards
2. Enhances efforts on the adoption of a law on access to information  

The efforts of our partners lobbying, both in Geneva and locally, resulted in Burkina Faso and Djibouti receiving 16 and 14 recommendations respectively. 


To keep up to date with our partner’s latest work, follow them on social media:

[Centre National de Presse Norbert Zongo](https://twitter.com/CnpNorbertZongo)


large_Burkina Faso.png

medium_Burkina Faso.png

small_Burkina Faso.png

thumbnail_Burkina Faso.png

Burkina Faso.png

The government of Burkina Faso should protect freedom of expression by abolishing severe punishments for speech related offences.

Burkina Faso is a country located in West Africa with a population estimate of 22.1 million. Its 1991 Constitution  provides for various rights including the rights to freedom of expression, opinion, privacy, association, assembly and others. 

Reporters without Borders describes it as ‘’one of Africa’s success stories’’ thanks to its ‘’dynamic, professional and diverse media’’. The country made notable democratic progress following the departure of President Blaise Compaoré. The media environment has improved and defamation was decriminalized, although heavy fines and closures of media outlets can still be prescribed as punishments. Additionally, 2019 amendments to the criminal code prescribed severe punishments for the publication of ‘’false information’’. Freedom of expression is largely unrestricted and NGOs operate freely, however, legal restrictions and violent threats from Islamist militant groups hinder such activities. 

Burkina Faso

large_Djibouti.png

medium_Djibouti.png

small_Djibouti.png

thumbnail_Djibouti.png

Djibouti.png

Djibouti must do more to apply international human rights standards to its digital rights policies

Djibouti is a small country on the horn of Africa with a population estimate of 1 million. It gained independence from France in 1977 and its authoritarian President Ismail Omar Guelleh has been ruling the country since 1999, making him one of Africa’s longest-serving heads of state. 

Its 1992 Constitution (as amended) provides for the rights to freedom of expression, opinion, privacy, association, assembly and others. However, these rights and freedoms are severely restricted by the government. Journalists and media face threats, attacks and judicial harassment. The authorities further resort to deliberately slowing down the internet to restrict freedoms online. 

Djibouti

large_UPR 44 blog post graphic.png

medium_UPR 44 blog post graphic.png

small_UPR 44 blog post graphic.png

thumbnail_UPR 44 blog post graphic.png

UPR 44 blog post graphic.png

A summary of recommendations made to Burkina Faso and Djibouti during the 44th session of the Universal Periodic Review

The 44th session of the Universal Periodic Review: Digital Rights in Burkina Faso and Djibouti

Mali, Botswana and Burundi were reviewed at the [43rd Universal Periodic Review](https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/upr/upr-sessions) which took place during May 2nd-4th 2023. Uproar worked with partners [CyberSmart Botswana](https://www.facebook.com/CybersmartBW/) and [Internet Society of Mali](https://isoc.ml/) to lobby for digital rights during the reviews. Keep reading to find out the results of UPR43 and what digital rights successes have been made for these countries.

> “The amount of recommendations on freedom of expression online and off made during the 43rd session is incredibly significant. As detailed below, the recommendations made are set to make a positive impact on legislation in Mali, Botswana and Burundi, setting up all three countries for a more optimistic future for human rights. Clearly, our partners' hard work and enthusiasm in Geneva has paid off.” 
**Hannah Machlin, Advocacy Manager of Uproar**


# Mali

Although freedom of expression is guaranteed under Article 4 of the current 1992 Constitution, various laws and regulations restrict it, the most significant being Law 056-2019, commonly known as the Repression of Cyber-criminality Law. 

Uproar and our partners put forward the following recommendations on digital rights for Mali, prior to their review on May 2, 2023:

- End the practice of internet shutdowns and blocking of social media platforms and ensure that restrictions to the internet are consistent with fundamental human rights norms.
- Revise and amend Law 056-2019, on suppression of cyber-crimes and Press Law 046-00 by repealing obsolete provisions like criminal defamation.
- Enact a comprehensive access to information law, in line with Mali’s international legal obligation.

[Mali](https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1j/k1ja0pkd1t) received **7** recommendations on the issue of freedom of expression with **1** country highlighting digital rights and a further **3** countries mentioning freedom of expression in their opening remarks:

**Denmark’s** opening remark states they are deeply concerned about the shrinking of civil spaces through censorship, self censorship and reprisals. They recommend Mali to guarantee a civic space without reprisals and freedoms of opinion, expression, peaceful assembly and association as enshrined in the ICCPR.

**Luxembourg** recommends Mali to protect civic space through guaranteeing the full enjoyment of freedom of opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and association for all, in particular civil society, human rights defenders, journalists and political parties and groups, especially from the opposition.

**Mexico** recommends Mali ensure the professional rights of journalists, activists and human rights defenders.

In **Norway’s** opening statement, they acknowledge that freedom of expression is under severe pressure and therefore recommend Mali to uphold the right to freedom of association, peaceful assembly and expression and ensure the safety of journalists, human rights defenders and activists.

**Spain** highlighted digital rights, recommending Mali to guarantee freedom of expression in order to prevent harassment and intimidation against dissident voices and they also must revise the press law including decriminalisation of defamation and the cybercrime law.

**Sweden** acknowledges in their opening statement that freedom of expression has been curtailed and recommends Mali to ensure freedom of expression as well as allow journalists to work in an unhindered manner.

**Finland** recommends Mali guarantee freedom of expression and opinion, peaceful assembly and association and end all forms of arbitrary arrests, detentions and disproportionate use of force, intimidation and harassment.

**Ireland** state in their opening remark they are deeply concerned by the deteriorating security and human rights situation in Mali including constraints of freedom of expression.

In their opening statement, **Montenegro** remains concerned with reported cases of violations of civil and political rights, pressure on freedom of expression and attacks on human rights defenders.

**Poland** highlights freedom of expression in their opening statement, expressing Mali ensure that fundamental freedoms, especially freedom of expression are respected and investigate the cases of killings of journalists.


# Botswana

Prior to their review on May 2, 2023, Uproar recommended that Botswana should uphold its international and regional commitments to human rights and refrain from digital rights restrictions and media violations. 

Uproar and our partners put forward the following recommendations on digital rights:

- Revise legislation and repeal provisions in the Penal Code, Cyber Crimes Act and Related Crimes Act that arbitrarily interfere with the exercise of free expression, both online and offline.
- Enact a comprehensive Freedom of Information law inline with Botswana’s constitutional and international legal obligations. 
- End intimidation and harassment of journalists and others exercising their right to free expression both online and offline and hold to account those that violate journalists’ rights.
- Fully respect, protect and promote the right to privacy of persons through effective implementation of laws.

[Botswana](https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uyawzk9o) received **10** recommendations on the issue of freedom of expression:

**Czechia** recommends Botswana ensure freedom and plurality of media.

**Germany** recommends Botswana guarantee the protection of politicians, journalists and dissidents and investigate intimidation and threats against them, and eliminate from legislations all provisions that undermine freedom of press and the media.

**Ghana** recommends Botswana revise national legislation that might unduly restrict the right to freedom of expression.

**Italy** recommends Botswana strengthen efforts to ensure freedom of expression as well as independence and freedom of media; and guarantee a safe and enabling environment for journalists and human rights defenders.

**Kenya** recommends Botswana continue with efforts to promote rights to freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful assembly and association for all.

The **Netherlands** recommends Botswana contribute to the safety of civil society, including human rights defenders and journalists, by refraining from using criminal charges to obstruct freedom of expression and information.

**New Zealand** recommends Botswana to eliminate from legislation or provisions that undermine freedom of the press and independence of the media.

**Spain** recommends Botswana fully ensure freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful assembly and association.

**Switzerland** recommends Botswana guarantee freedom of the media and freedom of expression and information, and take measures to protect media professionals against attacks, harassment and intimidation, especially as the upcoming elections approach.

The **United Kingdom** recommends Botswana take effective measures to address threats to democracy by strengthening media freedom, freedom of expression and transparency and accountability.

# Burundi

Uproar states that Burundi should adopt a robust personal data protection law and protect freedom of expression in accordance with international human rights standards. 

We lobbied for the following recommendations on digital rights for Burundi prior to their review on May 4, 2023:

- Remove sanctions against media outlets and open all the remaining media houses closed since 2015 including IWACU press house. 
- End intimidation and harassment of journalists and others exercising their right to free expression, amend all press laws that unnecessarily hinder media freedom and hold to account those that violate journalists’ rights.
- Enact a comprehensive data protection law in accordance with international normative standards, to protect the right to privacy online, and provide adequate funding to support its implementation. 
- Ensure that the internet, including social media and other digital communication platforms, remain open, accessible, and secure across Burundi, and that the government refrains from any future internet disruptions, especially during elections.

[Burundi](https://media.un.org/en/asset/k18/k18lievama) received **17** recommendations on the issue of freedom of expression with a further **4** countries mentioning it in their opening statements:

**Argentina** recommends Burundi adopt measures to ensure freedom of expression and opinion peaceful assembly and association as well as the normal functioning of civil society and human rights defenders.

**Belgium** recommends Burundi expedite the amendment of the law on freedom of press and adopt amendments to bring an end to intimidation and prosecution of journalists and civil society who are carrying out their rightful functions.

**Canada** gave two recommendations to Burundi - firstly, to take all necessary measures to guarantee freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association and expression, free of any intimidation, reprisals or discrimination. Secondly, to repeal all restrictive provisions applied since 2015 to ensure civil societies actors including media and journalists can perform their work freely and independently, free from fear of intimidation or reprisals.

**Chile** recommends Burundi accelerate review of the press law in line with standards on freedom of expression and approve a law on protection of human rights defenders.

**Finland** recommends Burundi to allow civil society activists, journalists and human rights organisations to carry out their work without any obstruction or reprisals including by lifting the legal and financial measures targeting them.

**Ireland** recommends Burundi ensure a safe and enabling environment for civil society, human rights defenders, journalists and other media workers to carry out their work without fear of persecution, intimidation and undue interference.

**Italy** also recommends Burundi ensure freedom of expression and association and create a safe enabling environment for civil society.

In their opening statement, **Lithuania** expresses concern that human rights defenders, journalists and media workers have become targets of violence, harassment and intimidation. As a result, they recommend Burundi take measures to ensure that human rights defenders, journalists and media workers can exercise their rights to freedom of opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and association without fear of reprisals, prosecution or intimidation.

**Luxembourg** recommend Burundi expedite the amendment of the law on the press in line with norms on freedom of expression and adopt a law on the protection of human rights defenders.

**Montenegro** recommends Burundi provide a safe and enabling environment for civil society, human rights defenders, journalists and other media workers to conduct their work independently.

**Norway** recommends Burundi end reprisals against human rights defenders, journalists, members of the opposition and civil society.

The Republic of **Korea** also recommend Burundi ensure a safe and enabling environment where civil society, human rights defenders and media workers can exercise their rights to Freedom of expression and peaceful assembly without fear of reprisal.

**Slovakia’s** opening statement acknowledges efforts to improve the human rights situation across the countries including adoption of laws regulating the press, and end violations to freedom of expression and media freedom such as intimidation and physical attacks against journalists. They recommend Burundi put an end to measures that intimidate journalists and human rights defenders.

**Spain** recommends Burundi guarantee fully freedom of expression of the press and peaceful association and assembly, allowing free activities by all media without exception, lifting prohibitions on various human rights organisations and facilitating their return to the country.

**Switzerland** recommends Burundi continue with and finalise the adoption of a law to protect human rights defenders that is inline with international law, notably when it comes to protecting freedom of expression.

The **United Kingdom** recommends Burundi identify and implement policies which facilitates an active civil society and open media, and address in particular threats to journalists and human rights defenders.

**Uruguay** recommends Burundi step up efforts to amend laws regulating the press ensuring freedom of expression to meet commitments made at regional and international level.

In their opening statement, **Côte d’Ivoire** congratulates the government of Burundi on their efforts for promoting and protecting human rights including the law on the press and the adoption of the social protection code.

**Georgia**, in their opening statement, is alarmed by reports of violations of freedom of expression and media freedom and reprisals against human rights defenders and members of human rights organisations.

**Philippines**’ opening statement recognises steps taken by Burundi to strengthen its institutional framework on human rights, most notably, the adoption of a new constitution in 2018 that guarantees freedom of expression and right to privacy.

In **Sudan’s** opening statement, they commend the progress made by Burundi in legal reform that covered enacting laws on the rise of the protection of persons with disabilities and the regulation of the press and social protection, and the prevention and prohibition of cybercrimes as well as the creation of the truth and reconciliation commission among others.

The efforts of our partners lobbying, both in Geneva and locally, resulted in Mali, Botswana and Burundi receiving 7, 10 and 17 recommendations on freedom of expression respectively. Although these countries impede digital rights through restrictive practices like internet shutdowns, it is great to see so many countries highlighting freedom of expression in their recommendations at UPR43. 

We implore that the countries of Mali, Botswana and Burundi focus on their digital rights situations and effectively implement these recommendations so that citizens, journalists, human rights defenders and activists alike may safely experience freedom of expression both offline and online.

To keep up to date with our partners' latest work, follow them on social media:

[CyberSmart Botswana](https://twitter.com/CybersmartBW)

[Internet Society of Mali](https://twitter.com/isocml)

large_Mali (1).png

medium_Mali (1).png

small_Mali (1).png

thumbnail_Mali (1).png

Mali (1).png

Decriminalize defamation and adopt a comprehensive freedom of information law.   

Mali is located in West Africa and has a population of 21.5 million people. Its 1992 constitution enshrines freedom of expression and press freedom, but in practice protections for these fundamental freedoms are fragile, particularly in light of political instability and violent extremism. Authorities target media and journalists covering security issues and anti-government protests and have previously restricted access to social media services to prevent protesters from mobilizing. Defamation is a crime and the country does not have a comprehensive freedom of information law. 

Mali

large_Mali.png

medium_Mali.png

small_Mali.png

thumbnail_Mali.png

Mali.png

large_Burundi.png

medium_Burundi.png

small_Burundi.png

thumbnail_Burundi.png

Burundi.png

Burundi should adopt a robust personal data protection law and protect freedom of expression in accordance with international human rights standards.

Burundi is a country located in East Africa with a population estimate of 12.6 million. Political instability, ethnic-based violence and episodes of civil war between the Tutsi and Hutu ethnic groups since the country’s independence from Belgium have had long-lasting impacts on economic development, politics and human rights in the country. Its 2005 Constitution includes the right to privacy, association, assembly, expression and others. However, the protection of these rights in the online space is limited. 

For example, Burundi’s Penal Code and Press Law, 2015 both pose huge threats to the protection of online rights. These laws have also been used to arrest and harass journalists. In addition to this, Burundi has constantly threatened the civic space with arbitrary suspension of civil society organisations. The country also needs a data protection law and an independent communications regulator that must be committed to apply international human rights standards to its various practices. 

Burundi

large_Botswana.png

medium_Botswana.png

small_Botswana.png

thumbnail_Botswana.png

Botswana.png

Botswana needs to bring its laws and practices in line with international human rights standards to protect digital rights. 

Botswana is located in Southern Africa with a population estimate of 2.4 million. Its1996 Constitution (as amended) provides for various rights including the rights to freedom of expression, association, assembly, privacy and others. The Government of Botswana continues to harass journalists by using criminal defamation charges to limit online expression.

Although freedom of speech is guaranteed under the constitution, journalists and media are harassed for their reporting. Moreover, a government ban on private-media advertising causes the dominance of state-run outlets which are biased in reporting. According to the 2008 Media Practitioners Act all media workers and outlets—including websites and blogs— must be registered with violations punishable by a fine or imprisonment. 

Botswana

large_UPR 43 blog post graphic.png

medium_UPR 43 blog post graphic.png

small_UPR 43 blog post graphic.png

thumbnail_UPR 43 blog post graphic.png

UPR 43 blog post graphic.png

A summary of recommendations made to Mali, Botswana and Burundi during the 43rd session of the Universal Periodic Review

The 43rd session of the Universal Periodic Review: Digital Rights in Mali, Botswana, Burundi

Ahead of the latest [43rd Universal Periodic Review](https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/upr/upr-sessions), Uproar and partners [CyberSmart Botswana](https://www.facebook.com/CybersmartBW/) and [Internet Society of Mali](https://isoc.ml/) travelled to Geneva for Pre-Sessions 43 to lobby for digital rights in [Botswana](https://uproar.fyi/where-we-work/country/botswana), [Burundi](https://uproar.fyi/where-we-work/country/burundi) and [Mali](https://uproar.fyi/where-we-work/country/mali). 

This was held at the United Nations’ Geneva office Palais des Nations between 3-6th April 2023, with Botswana being held on the 3rd and Burundi and Mali being held on the 4th. As the Pre-Sessions were conducted online from 2020-2022, it has been great for the Uproar network to be able to attend in person again.

These Pre-Sessions were introduced during the second cycle of the UPR in 2012, allowing for National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) to engage with representatives of the recommending States under Review (SuR) prior to UPR. It also offers an opportunity for permanent missions to learn directly about the human rights situation in the countries under review. 

This empowers the Uproar network to engage directly at the UN, by lobbying policymakers in person in order to uphold digital rights and related legislation.

**Hannah Machlin**, Advocacy Manager of Uproar, travelled to Geneva along with our partners [David Moepeng](https://twitter.com/DavidMoepeng) of Cybersmart Botswana and [Malick Maiga](https://twitter.com/MalickMAIGA4) of Internet Society of Mali.

The **Internet Society** (ISOC) is an American nonprofit advocacy organisation founded in 1992 with nearly 130 chapters and Special Interest Groups (SIG) and 88 organisation members spanning across 180 countries. The ISOC-Mali chapter was established in 1998 in order to promote and educate on Internet usage in Mali through means such as participating in conferences and training members, NGOs and the general public. They also support the State in the development of strategies such as the National ICT Policy and the Mali Digital Strategy.

**Malick Maiga** is a telecommunications engineer from Institut National des Télécommunications et des Technologies de l'Information et de la Communication (INTTIC) located in Oran, Algeria and serves as the officer of the Mali chapter. 

**Cybersmart Botswana** is a CSO that aims to educate the public on cybersecurity by running awareness campaigns in order to promote safe practices and procedures online. Most recently, the initiative launched The African Cybersmart Network, a union of non-profit organisations working collectively to promote cybersecurity awareness throughout Africa. The aim of this network is to unite all similar organisations across Africa in order to share resources and work together, engaging in regional exchanges.

**David Moepeng**, Cybersecurity Awareness Specialist and lead coordinator of the African Cybersmart Network, also spoke on the panel discussion on Botswana, highlighting the importance of how digital rights are human rights. 

Speaking on the experience of working with Uproar and attending the Pre-Sessions, this is what Moepeng had to say:

> “In an era where, as society increasingly becomes digitalized, effective digital governance becomes a necessity, the UPR Process is a perfect platform for engagement on ways to advance human-centric digital policies. Coming from a country like Botswana, where despite the government aggressively driving digital transformation, the voice of civil society and other watchdog structures, has been silent, it was therefore ground breaking for Cybersmart Botswana and Small Media to bring to the fore, the effect of Botswana’s digital and media policies on human rights.
>
> Participating in the UPR process and working with the Small Media Team also exposed me, as a digital rights activist, doing advocacy at the highest level at the UN, to best practice, not only in terms of the use of UN systems to advance human rights, but in the review of polices and presentation of arguments for change.”

Ahead of the 43rd Universal Periodic Review, these were the recommendations given for the aforementioned countries. 

**Mali** was reviewed on May 2 at 14:30 - 18:00 CET / 13:30 - 17:00 GMT. We put forward the following recommendations on digital rights:

- End the practice of internet shutdowns and blocking of social media platforms and ensure that restrictions to the internet are consistent with fundamental human rights norms.
- Revise and amend Law 056-2019, on suppression of cyber-crimes and Press Law 046-00 by repealing obsolete provisions like criminal defamation.
- Enact a comprehensive access to information law, in line with Mali’s international legal obligation

**Botswana** was reviewed on May 3 at 9:00 - 12:30 CET / 8:00 - 11:30 GMT. We suggest the following digital rights recommendations:

- Revise legislation and repeal provisions in the Penal Code, Cyber Crimes Act and Related Crimes Act that arbitrarily interfere with the exercise of free expression, both online and offline.
- Enact a comprehensive Freedom of Information law in line with Botswana’s constitutional and international legal obligations.
- End intimidation and harassment of journalists and others exercising their right to free expression both online and offline and hold to account those that violate journalists’ rights.
- Fully respect, protect and promote the right to privacy of persons through effective implementation of laws.

**Burundi** was reviewed on May 4 at 9:00 - 12:30 CET / 8:00 - 11:30 GMT. We suggest the following digital rights recommendations:

- Remove sanctions against media outlets and open all the remaining media houses closed since 2015 including IWACU press house. 
- End intimidation and harassment of journalists and others exercising their right to free expression, amend all press laws that unnecessarily hinder media freedom and hold to account those that violate journalists’ rights.
- Enact a comprehensive data protection law in accordance with international normative standards, to protect the right to privacy online, and provide adequate funding to support its implementation. 
- Ensure that the internet, including social media and other digital communication platforms, remain open, accessible, and secure across Burundi, and that the government refrains from any future internet disruptions, especially during elections.

To see the results of UPR43 and what recommendations Mali, Botswana and Burundi received, read our blog post [here](
https://uproar.fyi/blog/article/the-43rd-session-of-the-universal-periodic-review-digital-rights-in-mali-botswana-burundi).


large_upr pre session 1.png

medium_upr pre session 1.png

small_upr pre session 1.png

thumbnail_upr pre session 1.png

upr pre session 1.png

Uproar and partners CyberSmart Botswana and Internet Society of Mali attend the Pre-Sessions in Geneva

UPR43 Pre-Session in Geneva: Lobbying for Digital Rights in Botswana, Burundi and Mali

The [42nd Universal Periodic Review](https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/upr/upr-sessions) took place across January - February 2023, with Gabon and Ghana being reviewed on January 24 and Benin on January 26. Uproar worked alongside partners [Internet Without Borders](https://internetwithoutborders.org/), [Paradigm Initiative](https://paradigmhq.org/) and [Human Security Research Centre Ghana](https://www.hsrcgh.org/) to advocate for digital rights at the reviews of Benin, Gabon and Ghana respectively. Keep reading to find out the results of UPR42 and what digital rights successes have been made for these countries.

> “We truly celebrate the recommendations made and hope the government of Ghana takes meaningful measures in realizing digital rights.”
**Thobekile Matimbe, Senior Partnerships and Engagements Manager of Paradigm Initiative**


# Benin

Prior to Benin’s fourth cycle at UPR42, Uproar and our partners recommended that Benin must uphold its constitutional and international obligations to freedom of expression online and offline by ending internet shutdowns and amending the Digital Code. We lobbied for the following recommendations to be made:

-  Guarantee access to the internet at all times by ensuring that the internet, including social media and other digital communication platforms, remain open, accessible, and secure across Benin including during elections. This includes removing unnecessary registration procedures for online media. 
-  Review and amend provisions of the Digital Code that unnecessarily restrict freedom of expression and digital rights, specifically sections that provide for prosecution and imprisonment for online content that is purportedly false. 
- End intimidation, censorship and harassment of journalists and others exercising their right to free expression and hold to account those that violate journalists’ rights.


Subsequently, [Benin](https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1e/k1ejafjdxq) received **16** recommendations on the issue of freedom of expression with **11** of those recommendations focused on digital rights from the following countries:

**Australia** recommends Benin review the impact of the Digital Code and the Electoral Code to ensure the protection of political participation.

**Canada** also recommends Benin review the Digital Code in order to protect the freedom of the press, particularly with regard to article 550 on harassment through electronic communications.

**Costa Rica** recommends Benin guarantee freedom of expression and opinion as well as reform the Digital Code to make it compatible with the right.

In **Denmark’s** opening statement, they acknowledge that Benin’s constitution guarantees freedom of expression under Articles 23 and 24 yet remain concerned that freedom of expression has been restricted online. As a result, they recommend Benin review and amend provisions in the Digital Code that restrict freedom of expression and rights online, specifically sections that provide for prosecutions and imprisonment of online content that is purportedly false.

**Estonia** recommends Benin revise the Digital Code, in particular Article 550, which unduly restricts citizens’ right to freedom of expression, notably by removing prison sentences for the offence of false information.

**Lithuania** recommends Benin to consider amending the Digital Code provisions that unnecessarily restrict freedom of expression and infringe on the rights of journalists.

**Luxembourg** recommends that Benin revise the Digital Code to align with international law and enable human rights defenders to work freely without fear.

**Spain** recommends Benin amend Article 550 of the Digital Code which restricts the right to freedom of expression as well as ensuring independence of the Higher Authority on the Audio-Visual Media and Communication.

**Switzerland** recommends Benin amend the Digital Code in order to guarantee the right to freedom of expression, including for journalists and HRDs so that it’s in line with Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

**The United States** recommends Benin allow their citizens and journalists to freely engage in discourse without any threat of harassment or arrest, including by revising the Digital Code, which unduly restricts the right to freedom of expression.

**Uruguay** recommends that Benin aligns the national legislation to guarantee the rights of LGBTQIA+ persons particularly the supplication of the Digital Sector Code and its implication for the freedom of expression of that group.

It was a great success to see so many countries put forward recommendations that we recommended ourselves, 

Many of the digital rights recommendations highlighted the amendments to the Digital Code, which the Uproar team and partners had lobbied for. 

In response to the aforementioned recommendations, **Mr. Timothy Yabit**, from Benin’s government delegation had the following to say:

> “In line with its constitution, freedom of the media remains the rule. This is strengthened by the recent adoption of an organic law on the Senior Media-Visual Authority, an independent body which ensures respect of freedom of the press. This authority provides journalists with press cards, which is no longer under the ambit of the ministry of communication. 
In regards to the digital sphere, the Digital Code has been a model for various countries in the sub-region as it reflects the vision of the government on universal access to the digital world. However, some individuals who rarely hold press cards make illegal use of the communications provided by the Digital Code and judges remind them of the legal provisions in place. Developments imposed by technology and digital resources will mean regular assessment of the quality of regulatory and legal tools to strengthen digital rights.”

# Gabon

[Gabon](https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1e/k1ejafjdxq) was also in their fourth cycle of the UPR at the 42nd session. Uproar and partners stated that Gabon must uphold freedom of expression and information offline and online by aligning its laws and practices to international standards and halting internet shutdowns during elections. We put forth the following recommendations ahead of their review:

- Amend the Communication Code in line with best practices for international human rights and in collaboration with stakeholders such as the press & media, local and international civil society and academia irrespective of their political affiliations. 
- Implement a comprehensive and rigorous reform of the High Authority for Communication (HAC). Such reform should include a review of the established law of the authority to cure all loopholes that allow for repression of on and offline media and expression. Additionally, HAC officers should be trained in international human rights standards. 
- Refrain from implementing internet shutdowns

Gabon received **13** recommendations based on freedom of expression with **6** of those focusing on digital rights from the following countries:

**Belgium** recommends Gabon protect and promote freedom of expression both online and offline as well as the independent work of journalists.

**Brazil** recommends Gabon encourage the government to consider adopting a law on access to information in accordance to human rights.

**Estonia** recommends Gabon uphold freedom of expression online and offline by refraining from implementing internet shutdowns.

**Ireland** expressed concern about reports on continued restrictions to freedom of expression in Gabon, including the use of digital surveillance during elections, and the subjection of media workers and journalists to intimidation and censorship and arbitrary practices.

**Lithuania** recommends that Gabon strengthen the protection of freedom of expression and access to information offline and online by aligning national laws with international standards and refraining from internet shutdown practices.

**Namibia** recommends Gabon guarantee the freedom to seek, receive and impart information by developing and adopting a law on access to information.

In response to this, Gabon calls on the support of different partners in implementing the recommendations that they will accept. 

# Ghana
Ahead of [Ghana’s](https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1o/k1ozil43h0) fourth cycle on January 24 at UPR42, Uproar and partners stated that Ghana should reform its Criminal Offences and Electronic Communication Acts and implement a data protection law, to uphold its international commitments to ensure freedom of expression online and off. We put forth the following recommendations:

- Repeal Articles (1)185 and (1)208 of the Criminal Offences Act,1960 (Act29) and Article 74 of the Electronics Communications Act, 2008 (Act 775) which criminalise false news in order to better protect the freedom of opinion and expression of individuals online and offline. 
- Take steps in line with the Data Protection Act, 2012 (Act 843) to safeguard personal data and to prevent data breaches in violation of the right to privacy. 
- Take necessary legislative measures including implementing security sector reforms in order to safeguard journalists from harassment, intimidation, and physical attacks. 

Ghana received **12** recommendations on freedom of expression with **2** recommendations highlighting digital rights from the following countries:

**France** recommends Ghana maintain efforts with regard to freedom of the press by pursuing effective implementation of the law on right to information.

**Paraguay** recommends Ghana adopt necessary measures to guarantee access to information and reduce the digital divide in particular with regard to women.

Although Ghana may not have received as many digital rights recommendations as Benin and Gabon, there is no doubt that our lobbying efforts have paid off with **12** recommendations regarding freedom of expression and **7** countries commending Ghana’s Right to Information Law. 

Furthermore, UPR42 is a key milestone for enhancing human rights in Ghana as this was the first time the Ghanaian Parliament participated in the Universal Periodic Review! 

In this regard, on the 15th of March 2023, Uproar followed up Ghana’s review with an engagement with 17 Members of Parliament from the Select Committee on Communications where we reviewed the UPR process and discussed the outcome. In this meeting, we also highlighted Ghana’s decline in freedom of expression, falling 30 places to the 60th position, in the latest Reporters Without Borders index. The MPs showed concern and pledged to revive the country’s operational environment for both on and offline rights through legal reform.

> "We hope these results will improve the digital rights situation for citizens and journalists alike in these countries as we await to see how the respective governments will take note and effectively implement their recommendations."
**Cathy Anite, Director of Uproar**

The tireless lobbying of our partners, both locally and in Geneva, resulted in a positive step for digital rights at UPR42, with Benin, Gabon and Ghana receiving 11, 6 and 2 recommendations respectively. This is a step in the right direction in putting digital rights at the forefront of the UPR process.

To keep up to date with our partners' latest work, follow them on social media:

[Internet Without Borders](https://twitter.com/Internet_SF)

[Paradigm Initiative](https://twitter.com/paradigmhq)

[Human Security Research Centre Ghana](https://twitter.com/humanghana)


large_UPR 42 Banner.png

medium_UPR 42 Banner.png

small_UPR 42 Banner.png

thumbnail_UPR 42 Banner.png

UPR 42 Banner.png

A summary of recommendations made to Benin, Gabon and Ghana during the 42nd session of the Universal Periodic Review

The 42nd session of the Universal Periodic Review: Digital Rights in Benin, Gabon and Ghana

Since the launch of the new website in 2022, Uproar has had a considerable number of achievements. From the review of Tunisia and Morocco to workshops in Malawi and Zambia, we’re excited to update you all on what we’ve been up to. 

 

# UPR41: Tunisia and Morocco

We had great success working on the countries of Tunisia and Morocco for the 41st Universal Periodic Review. Both Tunisia and Morocco’s reviews took place on Tuesday 8 November at the UN Headquarters in Geneva. 

**Tunisia** received 15 recommendations on the issue of freedom of expression from the following countries: Austria, Czechia, Estonia, Costa Rica, Netherlands, Norway, Slovakia, Finland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Spain, Sudan, Switzerland and USA.

We were pleased to see that the Netherlands made a standout recommendation specifically highlighting digital rights:

> “The Netherlands recommends that Tunisia protect the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression by safeguarding Law 88 and reviewing Law Decree 54 on Cybercrime.”

In response to these recommendations, the Tunisian government reiterated the following:
- The new constitution guarantees freedom of expression under Chapter 27. There are no limits to these rights unless public freedoms and national defense need to be guaranteed in line with Article 19 of the ICCPR.
- The decree concerning online crime was reviewed with a view of striking a balance between freedom of expression and the dissemination of hate speech in accordance with international standards.
- Freedom of expression is not punished unless in cases of defamation and hate speech.
- The government has strengthened the competence of judges to defend freedom of expression.


**Morocco** received 17 recommendations on the issue of freedom of expression from the following countries: Spain, Switzerland, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Indonesia, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Norway, Peru, Romania, South Korea, USA and Venezuela

We particularly commend Greece’s recommendation for highlighting the issue of digital freedom: 

> “Greece recommends Morocco to ensure continued efforts to repeal unlawful restrictions on internet access and telecommunication in the future, especially regarding protests.”

In response to these recommendations, the Moroccan government reiterated the following:
- There is a clear improvement in institutional guarantees to freedom of expression and journalists based on principles of freedom, pluralism, independence, and protection on an institutional level.
- The Press Code has clear articles guaranteeing press freedoms.
- Fines have been imposed rather than prison sentences.


Our local and international partners including Access Now worked tirelessly for UPR41 and it was great to see their efforts pay off in terms of the recommendations made. 
We hope the governments of both countries follow through with these recommendations and truthfully uphold their statements regarding digital rights including freedom of expression, media, access to information and privacy for the people of Tunisia and Morocco. 

 


# UPR42 Pre-session in Geneva: Ghana, Gabon and Benin 

In November, the Uproar team along with Qemal Affagnon from Internet Without Borders and Thobekile Matimbe from Paradigm Initiative visited Geneva to participate in the pre-sessions for UPR42.


<center>

![FkCP2OdXwAEMcUG.jpeg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676567836/Fk_CP_2_Od_Xw_AE_Mc_UG_d1d76f7565.jpg)

</center>


This was the first time in almost 3 years that we have been able to visit the United Nations Office at Geneva and it was great to be back in person since our last visit in 2019. 


We met with UN representatives from Estonia, Belgium, Croatia, Netherlands and Canada to pressure them to make recommendations on Digital Rights in Ghana, Gabon and Benin.


<center>

![FkCP2OgWAAAnIjc.jpeg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676567838/Fk_CP_2_Og_WAA_An_Ijc_9ae40b517e.jpg)

</center>

We are pleased to say that our lobbying efforts from the pre-session were a great success but you’ll have to wait for our next blog post to see the outcome of UPR42!

 


# Small Media Recognition

The National Coalition for Human Rights Defenders recognised Small Media for their partnership under the Uproar project and for solidarity towards ensuring the protection of Human Rights Defenders in Uganda.


<center>

![SMF Award.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676567913/SMF_Award_ba5bd02059.jpg)

</center>


Ms. Margaret Sekagya, the former UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights Defenders handed the plaque to Catherine Anite, Uproar’s Director at the Coalition’s Annual General Assembly in Uganda.

<center>

![SMF award 1.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676567913/SMF_award_1_534bb691b7.jpg)

</center>


> “It is an honour to receive this recognition for our support towards enhancing freedom of expression, media and other digital rights through the UPR process and we look forward to continuing our partnership with the National Coalition for Human Rights Defenders.”
**Catherine Anite, Project Director, Uproar**

 


# Events and Workshops in Malawi, Tunisia and Zambia 


Uproar hosted multiple successful workshops on Digital Rights last year across a number of locations in Africa, including Malawi, Tunisia and Zambia. 


 


### Uproar Workshop at #FIFAfrica22: The UPR and Digital Rights

In September, Uproar hosted a 2-day workshop titled **‘The UPR and Digital Rights’** in partnership with Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa at the Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa (FIFAfrica22). This took place in Lusaka, Zambia and was the first physical event held since 2019 so it was exciting to be back!


<center>


![723A7B74-9FC6-4618-8735-224D27360B40.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676568568/723_A7_B74_9_FC_6_4618_8735_224_D27360_B40_9e32677a04.jpg)


</center>



The Uproar team held a variety of different workshops over the course of two days:

**Session 1:** Overview of the UPR | Catherine Anite & Hannah Machlin 
**Session 2:** International and Regional Frameworks on Digital Rights | Catherine Anite 
**Session 3:** Campaign and Advocacy Planning | Hannah Machlin 
**Session 4:** Resources, Tools, opportunities | Catherine Anite and Hannah Machlin 
**Session 5:** Introduction to News Literacy | Prossy Kawalya & George Lugalambi 
**Session 6:** Design & Digital Rights | Surasti Puri & Ethan Salmon 
**Session 7:** Data Visualisation | Surasti Puri & Ethan Salmon 
**Session 8:** Final Sprint | Surasti Puri & Ethan Salmon 

<center>

![C9E876FA-0FD8-412D-8D8C-747C3DC8552C.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676568342/C9_E876_FA_0_FD_8_412_D_8_D8_C_747_C3_DC_8552_C_54ac96f3c9.jpg)

</center>


We had over 30 participants representing a total of 20 countries across the globe including Benin, Burundi, Botswana, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States of America, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The range of backgrounds was just as diverse, from civil society and digital rights activism and advocacy to legal, journalism, and academia.


<center>

![4AFD55CE-44B2-4DF6-8E4D-D30327262B9C.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676568343/4_AFD_55_CE_44_B2_4_DF_6_8_E4_D_D30327262_B9_C_e0f17c6e77.jpg)

</center>


It was great to be able to dedicate a workshop on such a variety of issues around the issue of advocacy concerning the UPR and digital rights. Congratulations to our team for doing such an amazing job hosting these sessions to great success!

For another perspective on this workshop, read CIPESA’s follow-up blog post: 

[Participant Reflection on #FIFAfrica22: Effective Engagement in the UPR Process for Digital Rights Promotion](https://cipesa.org/2022/10/participant-reflection-on-fifafrica22-effective-engagement-in-the-upr-process-for-digital-rights-promotion/)


 


### Digital Rights in Tunisia in Light of the Universal Periodic Review: Insufficient Legislation and Rights at Risk

Ahead of Tunisia’s UPR session, Small Media Foundation and Access Now organised a one-day event in Tunisia to bring together global and local civil society organizations, diplomatic and UN representatives to jointly discuss the situation of digital rights in Tunisia, and to create a space for civil society coordination on digital rights through targeted advocacy goals and coordinated outreach.

<center>

![7097604A-BCA9-4B7E-BE46-4922C4A57F31.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676568780/7097604_A_BCA_9_4_B7_E_BE_46_4922_C4_A57_F31_3889c5c0ab.jpg)

</center>


The event presented the UPR mechanism and its importance, followed by four interactive sessions, each dedicated to one of the aforementioned rights, and a final session to present the outcomes of the discussions.

 

### Members of Parliament Engagement Workshop on Digital Rights!

Small Media in partnership with the Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation hosted the **‘Members of Parliament Engagement Workshop on Digital Rights!’** workshop at the Africa Internet Governance Forum last July in Lilongwe, Malawi.

<center>


![574F1303-C95A-41EF-B2F3-2D7BF42E7520.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676568885/574_F1303_C95_A_41_EF_B2_F3_2_D7_BF_42_E7520_c8dc5c79d3.jpg)

</center>


This workshop brought together a number of policymakers and invited them to participate in sessions on the following topics:

**Session 1:** The Electronic Transaction and Cyber Security Act 
**Session 2:** Digital Rights Bill – the significance and what the Digital Rights Coalition has been doing 
**Session 3:** Data Protection and Privacy

<center>

![D6BF1205-9F62-49CF-A58A-DB1A9BAF319B.jpg](https://res.cloudinary.com/cld-storage/image/upload/v1676568879/D6_BF_1205_9_F62_49_CF_A58_A_DB_1_A9_BAF_319_B_a3e692f6c7.jpg)

</center>


It was a great opportunity for the Uproar team to engage with various MPs and policymakers, with insightful discussions held by the participants after each session. Following all that hard work, we also had the opportunity to relax and socialise over some refreshments which was very much appreciated!

 


# Newsletter Launch

Last December we launched the long-awaited Uproar Newsletter so you can finally get updates on everything to do with Uproar, UPR and digital rights straight into your inbox!

This is a quarterly newsletter so we won’t go spamming your emails too much. If you’re interested in signing up and keeping up to date with us, follow the link below:

>[SUBSCRIBE](https://mailchi.mp/5f80eb2bd555/uproar)

 

That about sums up all our accomplishments for the end of 2022, remember to follow us on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/uproar_fyi) and [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/uproarfyi) for regular updates on all things Uproar!

 


Dodo Wang is a freelance Social Media consultant working for Uproar.

large_Vers 2_Uproar rewind summary late 2022.png

medium_Vers 2_Uproar rewind summary late 2022.png

small_Vers 2_Uproar rewind summary late 2022.png

thumbnail_Vers 2_Uproar rewind summary late 2022.png

Vers 2_Uproar rewind summary late 2022.png

A summary of our accomplishments from the last half of 2022.

Uproar Updates

large_misc author-01.png

medium_misc author-01.png

small_misc author-01.png

thumbnail_misc author-01.png

misc author-01.png

**25 October 2021** — the Sudanese military, led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan seized power through a coup, arresting members of the Transitional Government, declaring a state of emergency, which significantly disrupted internet and mobile communications. This prompted nationwide protests rejecting the military takeover and demanding transfer of power back to a civilian authority. The coup happened a week prior to Sudan’s third periodic review.

As a result, Sudan’s Ambassador to the United Nations requested for the [postponement of Sudan’s periodic review](https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1u9g4yoej) stating that the *‘recent unfortunate developments in the country had created an unstable situation’* affecting the participation of Sudanese officials in the review. The Bureau resolved to grant the Ambassador’s request for postponement, noting that Sudan’s last third cycle UPR session would be held at the 40th session in early 2022. Sudan’s review is currently [scheduled for 1 February 2022](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/UPRSessions.aspx).

Ahead of Sudan’s 3rd Review, the African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS), Small Media and partners submitted a joint stakeholder report highlighting the state of freedom of expression including digital rights, freedom of information and right to privacy in Sudan. During the review period, Sudan had embarked on a 39-month transition and was well into its second year.

The period under review is marked with a mix of positive and negative steps in relation to the protection and promotion of freedom of expression in Sudan. The 2019 Constitutional Charter, provides for, among others, the right to freedom of expression, to receive and publish information and press freedom. A new addition to the Rights Charter is the provision on the right to internet access.

Despite these constitutional guarantees, not much has changed in terms of realization and protection of these rights. Recent events have shown that repressive practices that were a common feature under the Bashir regime, remain in place. Authorities have also continued to rely on repressive laws to crack down on peaceful protests, disrupt internet and mobile connectivity and harass journalists, human rights defenders and perceived critics.

#### **During the beginning of the transition period in Sudan, a systematic state harassment of the media, journalists and online spaces temporarily subsided.**

The infamous National Intelligence and Security Services, authority behind media censorship in Sudan, had their wide powers reduced to gathering intelligence, and was renamed the General Intelligence Services (GIS). Routine raids to media houses by NISS agents and confiscations of entire print runs stopped.

However, these gains are currently under threat. [A recent decree](https://www.thenationalnews.com/mena/2021/12/26/sudanese-medics-say-178-protesters-hurt-in-latest-round-of-rallies/) by the coup leader, Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, has temporarily authorized GIS agents to conduct searches, detain suspects, among others, until the state of emergency is lifted. The decree also grants the GIS immunity from civil suits.

Sudanese journalists and citizens as a result, continue to face arrest, prosecution, harassment, and intimidation for expression related activities. Several journalists have been detained, harassed, attacked and their equipment damaged by security forces as they covered anti-coup protests that have continued to take place since 25 October. In the wee hours of 25 October, [armed forces raided the Sudan News Agency](https://africanarguments.org/2021/12/back-to-the-former-lies-sudan-reverts-to-media-repression-post-coup/), the state broadcaster, and detained its employees. Later that day, the General Director of the News Agency was summarily dismissed by a decree issued by Gen. Al-Burhan. [Media advisors and journalists in different states](http://www.acjps.org/sudan-military-coup-bloodshed-and-arbitrary-arrest-of-civilians-by-joint-security-forces/) across the country were also detained as the coup events unfolded. Sudanese Armed Forces [suspended the broadcast of some radio stations](http://www.acjps.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Click-Here-.pdf) including BBC, Monte Carlo, 69 FM Radio.

**On 7 November 2021**, Hassan Hamid, a photographer for the Arabic independent newspaper was attacked by police officers in Burri neighborhood in Khartoum as he filmed police cracking down on protestors. The officers who attacked him broke his camera.

**On 14 November 2021**, security forces in Khartoum [raided the home of Aljazeera bureau chief El Musalmi El Kabbashi](https://www.ifj.org/media-centre/news/detail/category/press-releases/article/sudan-authorities-arrest-al-jazeera-bureau-chief.html), arrested and detained him. Reasons for his detention were not given however it was suspected that his arrest could have been in connection with the coverage of the anti-coup protests. He was [released two days later](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/16/sudan-releases-al-jazeeras-bureau-chief). That same day, [another journalist](http://www.acjps.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Click-Here-.pdf), Shawgi Abdul Azim, was arrested by intelligence officers as he exited the Aljazeera offices in Khartoum after an interview. He was briefly detained at an unknown location and released after 4 hours.

**On 17 November 2021**, Ali Farassab, a journalist for Al-Tayyar independent newspaper [sustained a head injury from a gunshot](https://africanarguments.org/2021/12/back-to-the-former-lies-sudan-reverts-to-media-repression-post-coup/) that grazed him as security officers fired live ammunition to disperse protests in Khartoum Bahri. The police beat him and then [detained him](http://www.acjps.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Click-Here-.pdf) at Al-Mogran neighborhood police station in Khartoum. He was denied medical attention despite lawyers trying to intervene on his behalf. He was released days later without charge.

Social media and online communication platforms have been critical for the mobilization of nationwide protests across Sudan and corresponding mobilization in the diaspora.

#### **However, connectivity restrictions especially during politically charged situations, such as protests seem to have become the norm.**

**In June 2019**, an internet shutdown was put in place as the authorities violently dispersed a peaceful sit-in at the military headquarters. Internet was later restored on 9 July 2019 after 36 days of no access. After the restoration of the internet, social media was awash with images and videos from the 3 June 2019 massacre. At least 100 peaceful protestors were reportedly killed during this violent crackdown.

**On 25 October**, a disruption to internet, cellular and some fixed line connectivity was reported. Access to information and online mobilization around anti-coup protests was restricted. These disruptions have been imposed for a couple of hours to day-long disruptions. Mobile internet was reported to have been disrupted on 25 & 30 December 2021 as well as 2 January 2022.

> Speaking at the UN General Assembly in September 2019, former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok stated: **“Never again in the new Sudan will a journalist be repressed or jailed.”** Unfortunately, this promise was not followed through with and instead attacks on freedom of expression online and off continue to mark the political climate in Sudan.

As a result, The African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies and Small Media Foundation put forth the following recommendations, and call on UN member States to make to Sudan during its upcoming 3rd cycle Universal Periodic Review session:

- End internet shutdowns and ensure restrictions to the internet are in line with international human rights standards
- End intimidation and harassment of journalists and others exercising their right to freedom of expression; and
- Amend applicable provisions of problematic laws like the 1991 Criminal Act, 2009 Publications Act and the Law on Cybercrime in line with international human rights standards


Sudan will now be reviewed on 1 February, 2022 at 9:00AM CET. You can follow Uproar live-tweeting Sudan’s session [here](https://twitter.com/uproar_fyi).

Cynthia Ibale is a human rights lawyer currently advocating for improved human rights protection in Sudan.

large_Sudan.png

medium_Sudan.png

small_Sudan.png

thumbnail_Sudan.png

Sudan.png

End the practice of internet shutdowns and ensure that internet restrictions are consistent with fundamental norms of necessity and proportionality.

Sudan is located in northeast Africa and has a population of 46 million people. A 2021 military coup upended the country’s shaky transition to civilian rule, derailing democratic and human rights reforms. Since then the military authorities and security forces waged a crackdown on protesters, dissidents, human rights defenders and civil society. 

Digital rights protection faces a number of challenges. The Cybercrimes Act 2007 criminalizes, among others, defamation, breach of public order and morality, which attract a prison sentence, fine or both. Defamation is a crime under the Criminal Act of 1991. Additionally, Sudan has a record of internet shutdowns, usually imposed by military authorities during protests, and most recently to prevent cheating in exams. When it comes to privacy, there is no data protection law or authority to regulate the collection, storage and use of personal data, which leaves data control prone to abuse at the discretion of the state and private actors like telecoms. 

Sudan

large_1_iTeGel5WGapkUaWjL4Zqjg.png

medium_1_iTeGel5WGapkUaWjL4Zqjg.png

small_1_iTeGel5WGapkUaWjL4Zqjg.png

thumbnail_1_iTeGel5WGapkUaWjL4Zqjg.png

1_iTeGel5WGapkUaWjL4Zqjg.png

Understanding the mix of positive and negative steps in relation to the protection and promotion of freedom of expression in Sudan, from this UPR session.

Sudan at UPR: An opportunity to support domestic calls for urgent reforms

large_Tomi.png

medium_Tomi.png

small_Tomi.png

thumbnail_Tomi.png

Tomi.png

Mozambique has [ratified](https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/Treaty.aspx?CountryID=118&Lang=EN) the major international human rights instruments including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). As part of the various mechanisms introduced to monitor the rights protected under international human rights treaties, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by the United Nations Human Rights Council (the Council) in 2006.

The UPR is the [unique mechanism](https://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/upr/pages/uprmain.aspx) used to assess the human rights records of all UN member states. Carried out every four to five years, a State under review (SuR) submits a report which is assessed together with other reports submitted by other stakeholders in the State including independent experts and civil society organisations. The assessment is carried out by the UPR working group consisting of 47 UN member states but can be joined by other UN member states for such assessment.

The goal of the UPR is primarily to ensure that UN member states fulfill their human rights obligations under various international human rights treaties and systems. In doing this, member states are assessed based on various thematic aspects of human rights including children’s rights, rights of persons living with disability, women’s rights and many others.

However, an important thematic aspect of human rights that is beginning to gain traction is digital rights. Simply put, these rights are those enjoyed through the use or non-use of digital technologies. For the purpose of assessment at the UPR, these rights have been categorised into four broad categories namely freedom of expression and opinion; freedom of information and censorship of content; right to equal access and opportunity; and right to data protection and privacy on the Internet.

Mozambique has gone through three reviews since 2011. In terms of Mozambique’s performance at the UPR, its [first review](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/MZIndex.aspx) on 28 March 2011 at the Council’s seventeenth session received no specific recommendation on digital rights out of the 169 recommendations made by 52 UN member states. It also did not receive any general recommendation with respect to any of the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and association and assembly.

At the Council’s 32nd session on 12 April 2016 where Mozambique’s report was reviewed for the [second time](https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/MZIndex.aspx), it received 210 recommendations from 94 UN member states. Only nine of these recommendations referred to the right to freedom of expression, the press and access to information. Six of these recommendations were accepted by Mozambique.

At its [most recent review](http://webtv.un.org/watch/mozambique-review-38th-session-of-universal-periodic-review/6252363599001/) at the 38th session of the Council which was held on 4 May 2021, Mozambique received 266 recommendations. Out of these recommendations, 22 were on the right to freedom of expression, protection of journalists and human rights freedoms and media freedom. This marked the highest number of recommendations received by Mozambique at the UPR since its first review. Some of the recommendations received include those from Spain, Latvia, Netherlands, Ghana, France, Czech Republic, Uruguay, USA, Sweden, Slovenia, Norway, New Zealand, Malawi, Italy, Ireland, Germany, Canada, Iceland, Bulgaria, Iceland, Austria and Australia.

For example, France recommended that Mozambique should ‘guarantee the freedom of expression, association and assembly and the protection of human rights defenders; guarantee the freedom of the press and take all measures so that all journalists may carry out their work independently and without fear of reprisals.’

Bulgaria also noted in one of its recommendations that Mozambique should ‘ensure that the right to freedom of expression and freedom of press is respected including on the Internet space and maintain a positive environment for the work of independent media and journalists.’ Canada equally called for the need for Mozambique to respect the right to freedom of expression by recommending that it should ‘ensure the protection of freedom of expression provided for under international human rights law are reflected in the texts of new laws governing media and broadcasting and that they are respected in practice.’

With respect to media law reforms, Norway recommended that Mozambique ‘ensures that the on-going revisions and reforms of media laws protect freedom of expression and media freedoms, promote media pluralism and are based on stakeholder consultations.’ Sweden also toed the same line in its recommendation by stating that Mozambique should ‘redraft laws on social communications and the law on broadcasting to guarantee the freedom of expression including by increasing the space for dissent and discussion and ensure an enabling space for everyone to enjoy these rights.’

With a two-pronged recommendation on the right to freedom of expression, the United States recommended that Mozambique should ‘allow independent press and civil society access to report on conflict regions and uphold Mozambique’s domestic and international obligations and commitments to respect the freedom of expression including those of the members of the press.’ In terms of access to justice and protection of the press, it recommended that Mozambique should ‘investigate and hold accountable those responsible for violent attacks against members of the press.’

These are some of the highlights of the recommendations received by Mozambique which also mirror some of the concerns of local stakeholders who work on the protection of digital rights both in and outside Mozambique. This can be seen in the [submission](https://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=438) made by three civil society organisations for review at the recent 38th session. The organisations, namely the [Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa](http://www.cipesa.org/) (CIPESA), [Small Media](http://www.smallmedia.org.uk/), [Fórum das Associações Moçambicanas das Pessoas com Deficiência](https://www.famod.org/) (FAMOD) and the [Associação de Cegos e Amblíopes de Moçambique](http://acamo.co.mz/acamo/) highlighted a number of challenges being faced by digital rights in Mozambique to include low [Internet penetration](https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2020-mozambique), [attacks on journalists](https://www.misa.org.mz/index.php/destaques/noticias/79-o-estado-deve-por-termo-a-perseguicoes-e-atentados-%20contra-jornalistas-em-mocambique) and [systemic threats](https://globalvoices.org/2016/05/16/the-government-of-mozambique-is-spying-on-its-citizens-according-to-%20verdade/) against the right to data protection and privacy.

In its recommendations on how to surmount these challenges, the submission made five recommendations including the need to increase capacity building on the right to information law, the repeal of provisions of the COVID-19 Decree which have been found to be non-compliant with international human rights standards; the need to improve access to justice mechanisms for media practitioners; improving Internet access especially for vulnerable groups by optimising the Universal Service Fund; and ensuring the enactment of a data protection law.

In summary, Mozambique should consider accepting the recommendations made to it by various UN member states and other stakeholders at the recently concluded review. This is because the protection of human rights online is no longer a luxury, especially when the impacts of the ongoing COVID-19 on human development is critically considered. Therefore, in protecting these rights, Mozambique should ensure that its policies on digital rights protection are rights-respecting and multi-stakeholder in its approach in order to have an improved human rights record especially towards its next review at the UPR.

large_Mozambique.png

medium_Mozambique.png

small_Mozambique.png

thumbnail_Mozambique.png

Mozambique.png

Mozambican authorities must uphold international obligations on freedom of expression, and refrain from attacking journalists covering important and sensitive issues.

A Southeastern country by the Indian ocean. Its population is 30 million and the government is a one-party dominant presidential republic.

In Mozambique journalists who report on sensitive issues are at risk of violent attacks. In the 2019 presidential election year, human rights organizations documented several cases in which journalists and activists were threatened and subjected to pressures interfering with their work, including threats that were sent via SMS. Since June 2018, the government has barred various media organizations and correspondents from visiting the northern province of Cabo Delgado, while the army detained journalists who had travelled to cover the fighting against an armed Islamist group. The police also arrested several journalists on bogus charges.

Mozambique

large_1_6TThHEmO9S-lfxzaPOjWnw (1).png

medium_1_6TThHEmO9S-lfxzaPOjWnw (1).png

small_1_6TThHEmO9S-lfxzaPOjWnw (1).png

thumbnail_1_6TThHEmO9S-lfxzaPOjWnw (1).png

1_6TThHEmO9S-lfxzaPOjWnw (1).png

Discussing the state of freedom of expression and digital rights in Mozambique as it comes under review during the 38th session of the UPR.