large_Dodo.png

medium_Dodo.png

small_Dodo.png

thumbnail_Dodo.png

Dodo.png

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_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

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

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.

OHCHR submission_Mauritius_SMF_Session45.pdf

small_Resources thumbnail.png

thumbnail_Resources thumbnail.png

Resources thumbnail.png

UPR45 Mauritius Factsheet .pdf

small_Factsheet thumbnail.png

thumbnail_Factsheet thumbnail.png

Factsheet thumbnail.png

Free expression

Digital rights

Ethnic, religious, and linguistic minorities

Journalists and media workers

LGBT+

Equality and non-discrimination

Association and assembly

Advox is a project of Global Voices. They are a global network of activists and journalists dedicated to protecting freedom of expression and free access to information online. They report on threats to online speech, share tactics for defending the work and words of netizens, and support efforts to improve Internet policy and practice worldwide.
 
Global Voices is an international, multilingual, primarily volunteer community of writers, translators, academics, and human rights activists. The non-profit reports, translates, defends and empowers freedom of expression.

small_banner test.png

thumbnail_banner test.png

banner test.png

Global Voices

large_Global Voices@2x.png

medium_Global Voices@2x.png

small_Global Voices@2x.png

thumbnail_Global Voices@2x.png

Global Voices@2x.png

A global network of activists and journalists dedicated to protecting freedom of expression and free access to information online.

In partnership with Advox Global Voices - a global network of activists and journalists dedicated to protecting freedom of expression and free access to information online.

Uproar Tools are interactive data-driven tools that aim to show you how you can use the Universal Periodic Review to improve the situation of human rights in your country. 

Uproar Tools aims to show you how you can use the Universal Periodic Review to improve the situation of human rights in your country. 

The Tools were made in partnership between Uproar and Data4Change, a non-profit organisation working at the intersection of data, design, journalism and technology, collaborating with organisations on social and policy change interventions to forge real change and lasting impact.

Uproar Tools

large_Tools@2x.png

medium_Tools@2x.png

small_Tools@2x.png

thumbnail_Tools@2x.png

Tools@2x.png

Use our free interactive tools to build recommendations and tailor advocacy efforts at the Universal Periodic Review.

Uproar Tools 

Advocacy Assembly is a free multilingual e-learning platform set up in 2015 aimed at educating campaigners, activists, human rights defenders and journalists in digital rights and digital skills. 
In partnership with leading digital rights organisations and experts, Advocacy Assembly offers self-paced online courses in Arabic, English, Farsi and Spanish using a variety of videos, quizzes and slides. The courses cover topics like design, data science, investigative journalism, open source investigations, effective campaigning for social change and much more.

Advocacy Assembly

large_Advocacy Assembly@2x.png

medium_Advocacy Assembly@2x.png

small_Advocacy Assembly@2x.png

thumbnail_Advocacy Assembly@2x.png

Advocacy Assembly@2x.png

A free multilingual platform to access courses with leading organisations such as Amnesty International, Witness and Greenpeace. 

Advocacy Assembly is a free multilingual e-learning platform to educate on digital rights and digital skills.

Mauritius

Upr cycle

Resources

Read more