Is the internet a human right?

The Ugandan government has recognized the importance of the digital economy, with notable efforts made at building on the digitalization achievements of the country in recent years. However, despite the objectives of the Digital Uganda Vision, a multi-pronged strategy for the country adopted in 2019 to empower its citizens through universal inclusion, economic progress, poverty eradication, digital innovation, and digital government services, Internet access in 2022 stood at only 18% % – a mere 4% up from 2018. A major concern is the fact that the gap between women and men, and between urban and rural dwellers, has increased. This was at a time when demand for the Internet increased across the world as people sought to mitigate the risks associated with COVID-19 and the economic fallout of the lockdowns. The 2022 After Access Survey indicates that the main reasons for Ugandans being unable to access the Internet relate to a lack of awareness and knowledge of the Internet and the lack of affordable smart devices. Modeling of the After Access data across all African countries surveyed in the past indicates that the challenges correlate with low levels of education and income. It is for this reason that women, particularly rural women, are concentrated amongst the most marginalized.^[1]

The Internet has become an essential tool for communication, education, commerce, governance, and the exercise of human rights. Recognizing its importance, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), through Resolution A/HRC/20/L.13 of 2012, declared access to the internet a fundamental human right, asserting that the same rights enjoyed offline must also be protected online.² This declaration aligns with Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which guarantees the right to freedom of expression, including the right to “seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Similarly, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) under Article 19 reinforces this principle, emphasizing that restrictions on internet access must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate.^[2] However, while these international frameworks emphasize the significance of internet access, its realization in Uganda remains fraught with challenges, including restrictive government policies, high costs, digital illiteracy, and systemic censorship.

Access to the internet has become increasingly recognized as a fundamental human right, with its promotion playing a crucial role in advancing social, economic, and political development.  However, with the growth of the internet, issues related to cybercrime, privacy, and data protection have surfaced, challenging both individuals’ autonomy and societal security. Cybercrime, including hacking and data misuse, threatens privacy and data rights. Robust legal frameworks are needed to protect individuals’ privacy and control over their data.^[3] Recognizing data protection as an independent human right underscores the need to protect individuals in both physical and digital spaces. In the Ugandan case of Baguma-Mugarama v.

Uganda Revenue Authority,^[4] the court acknowledged that the right to privacy is not absolute and can be limited under certain conditions, such as for criminal investigations. This balance between protecting privacy and ensuring law enforcement highlights the complexities of safeguarding both internet access and personal data. The case of R v Brown further underscores the challenges posed by modern surveillance technologies, which threaten individuals’ right to keep their personal information private. In the context of internet access as a human right, legal frameworks must evolve to protect individuals from both digital crimes and invasions of privacy, ensuring that the internet remains an open and secure space for all.

Therefore, any formality, condition, restriction, or penalty imposed must be proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.^[5] In Handyside v. the United Kingdom Judgement of December 1976, the court stated that tolerance and respect for the equal dignity of all human beings constitute the foundations of a democratic and pluralistic society. Hence, it may be considered necessary in certain democratic societies to sanction or even prevent all forms of expression that spread, incite, promote, or justify hatred based on intolerance…, provided that any formalities, conditions, restrictions, or penalties imposed are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. In Surek (no.1) v. Turkey 1999 (Grand Chamber), the applicant published two readers’ letters vehemently condemning the military actions of the authorities in their struggle for independence and freedom. The applicant was convicted of disseminating propaganda against the indivisibility of the State and provoking enmity and hatred among the people. The Court held that there had been no violation of freedom of expression. The Court noted that the impugned letters amounted to an appeal to bloody revenge and that one of them had identified persons by name, stirring up hatred for them to the possible risk of physical violence. 

More so, a free and open internet plays a vital role in achieving global development goals, particularly the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). P De Hert and D Kloza, in “Internet (Access) as a New Fundamental Right: Inflating the Current Rights Framework?”^[6] note that the SDGs emphasize international cooperation in areas like economic growth, peace, and social inclusion, all of which depend on reliable digital access. While Internet shutdowns present ongoing challenges, the global commitment to improving the accessibility and quality of online services marks progress toward universal Internet access. By leveraging the SDGs as a framework, governments and organizations can work together to ensure that internet access is upheld as a fundamental right, fostering greater global connectivity and human rights protection. The case of Yunus Lubega Butanaziba v MTN (U) Limited⁸

underscores the critical need for privacy and data protection in the digital age, illustrating how breaches of these rights can cause significant harm to individuals, such as distress and embarrassment. This aligns with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions), which advocates for the protection of individual rights and ensuring access to justice, as well as Goal 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), which emphasizes the importance of secure and resilient digital infrastructure. The case underscores the crucial role of data protection in ensuring internet access, fostering trust, and supporting the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals in a secure, inclusive digital society.

Uganda’s domestic legal framework provides access to information, which is foundational to internet access. Article 41 of the 1995 Constitution of Uganda guarantees the right to access information in possession of the state, subject to national security and public interest exceptions. The Access to Information Act operationalizes this provision by setting guidelines for obtaining information from public bodies. However, these laws do not explicitly recognize internet access as a fundamental right, leaving the legal framework ambiguous. Courts have occasionally addressed digital rights concerns, such as in

Andrew Karamagi & Robert Shaka v. Attorney General,^[7] where petitioners challenged state-imposed restrictions on online freedoms. Nonetheless, the legal position remains unclear, allowing for arbitrary governmental control over digital spaces. Regionally, the African Commission on Human and

Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) has emphasized the importance of internet access in fostering democracy and human rights. The Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa (2019) asserts that states must promote affordable, equitable, and inclusive access to the Internet, prohibiting unnecessary restrictions. The East African Community (EAC), through the East African Communications Organization (EACO), has also advocated for harmonized ICT policies that promote digital rights. However, Uganda’s implementation of these commitments has been inconsistent, often contradicting regional human rights obligations.^[8] For instance, during the 2021 general elections, the government imposed a nationwide internet shutdown, which violated the principle of proportionality in restricting access to digital platforms. Such actions undermine Uganda’s compliance with regional digital rights standards.

International jurisprudence has also shaped the discourse on internet access as a fundamental right. In

Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India,^[9] the Indian Supreme Court held that indefinite internet shutdowns violate constitutional rights and must pass a strict proportionality test. Similarly, in Amnesty

International Togo and Ors v. The Togolese Republic,^[10] the African Court on Human and

Peoples’ Rights ruled that arbitrary internet shutdowns contravene the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. These cases provide persuasive legal reasoning that Uganda’s judiciary can adopt in digital rights adjudication. Despite these progressive rulings, Uganda’s government has continued to restrict digital freedoms, raising concerns over the extent to which the country has realized internet access as a human right.This coursework paper critically examines the extent to which Uganda has realized the right to access the internet by analyzing key aspects such as the legal and policy framework, affordability, digital inclusion, internet shutdowns, censorship, surveillance, and online freedom of speech. Additionally, it explores

Uganda’s ICT infrastructure development, the impact of taxation on internet access, and the country’s adherence to international digital rights obligations. By assessing these factors, this analysis

provides a comprehensive evaluation of Uganda’s progress and challenges in realizing Internet access as a fundamental right.

Uganda has attempted to incorporate digital rights into its legal framework, but challenges persist. In 2012, the United Nations (UN) declared access to the internet as a fundamental human right, emphasizing that the same rights protected offline must be upheld online, including the right to freedom of expression and privacy. This declaration aligns with Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights (UDHR) and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political

Rights (ICCPR), both of which guarantee the right to seek, receive, and impart information without interference. Uganda, a signatory to these international instruments, has faced significant challenges in fully

realizing the right to internet access. Although Article 41 of the Ugandan Constitution guarantees access to information, including digital information, Uganda has struggled to ensure that its citizens can enjoy unrestricted and affordable access to the Internet. While the Constitution aims to regulate the digital space, they have also been used to curtail internet freedom through provisions that restrict online expression and allow for government surveillance. For instance, the Social Media Tax (2018), later repealed, placed heavy financial burdens on citizens, making access to the internet unaffordable for many, especially in rural areas. Hence, although Uganda’s Constitution enshrines the right to access information and incorporate digital rights into its legal framework, the practical implementation of this right remains inconsistent and fraught with limitations.

Uganda has made significant strides in recognizing and protecting privacy rights, which are foundational to the right to access the internet. Article 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995, guarantees the right to privacy, including protection from unlawful interference with personal data, communications, and property. In 2019, Uganda further strengthened this right with the enactment of the Data Protection and Privacy Act, which provides a legal framework for safeguarding individuals’ privacy in the digital world. This Act ensures that data controllers adhere to lawful procedures when collecting, processing, and storing personal data, protecting citizens from the misuse of their information. The case of

Yunus Lubega Butanaziba v MTN (U) Limited demonstrates how these constitutional and statutory provisions have been used to hold companies accountable for breaches of privacy, with the court awarding damages for distress caused by a violation of the plaintiff’s right to privacy. This case reflects Uganda’s growing commitment to protecting privacy as a fundamental right, which is closely tied to the right to access the internet. The extent to which Uganda has realized the right to internet access as a human right is therefore limited, as the state continues to grapple with balancing control and access. While the legal framework shows potential, challenges such as internet censorship and restrictions on online expression hinder the full realization of this right in practice.

The increasing reliance on the Internet for communication, business, education, and democratic participation has led to global debates on whether Internet access should be recognized as a fundamental human right. In Uganda, Article 29(1)(a) of the 1995 Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression, including freedom of the press and other media. The phrase “other media” in Article 29(1)(a) of the 1995 Constitution of Uganda suggests an inclusive interpretation of communication channels beyond traditional print and broadcast media. In modern society, the Internet has become a primary medium for information exchange, journalism, political discourse, and social interaction. Given that the Constitution aims to protect freedom of expression, and since the internet serves as a critical platform for exercising this right, it follows that internet access is implicitly covered under the broader umbrella of “other media.” International legal instruments, such as the UNHRC Resolution of 2016 and the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights, emphasize the importance of internet access for fundamental freedoms. In

Uganda, cases likeUnwanted Witness v. Attorney General (2020) challenged internet

shutdowns on the basis that they violated the right to freedom of expression. While the courts acknowledged the role of the internet in modern communication, they stopped short of explicitly recognizing internet access as a constitutional right. Therefore, while Article 29(1)(a) can be interpreted to include the internet as a medium of expression, Uganda has yet to legally codify internet access as a standalone right.

Further, Uganda’s legal framework, including constitutional provisions and specific acts such as the Data Protection and Privacy Act, has made progress in recognizing and safeguarding digital privacy. For example, Section 18 of the Data Protection and Privacy Act provides that personal data shall be retained only for a period necessary to achieve the purpose for which the data is collected and processed. The Act applies to the collection, holding, and using personal data within Uganda and data collected outside Uganda relating to Ugandan citizens. However, Uganda’s internet shutdowns during politically sensitive events, as per the UN’s 2012 declaration, violate the right to access the internet as a human right, limiting citizens’ freedom of expression and participation in democratic processes, as per the 2021 elections. The Unwanted Witness v. Attorney General case^[11] underscored the need for internet shutdowns to meet the criteria of necessity, proportionality, and legality, echoing international human rights standards such as those found in Article 19 of the ICCPR, which guarantees freedom of expression. However, despite this ruling, the government has continued to implement shutdowns, justifying them as necessary for national security, thus undermining the broader human rights framework. The Unwanted Witness v. Uganda

Communications Commission (2020) case further highlighted the lack of a comprehensive policy ensuring the protection of internet freedoms in Uganda, pointing to the need for judicial review of decisions affecting online spaces. This legal inconsistency indicates that while Uganda has made strides in recognizing privacy and data protection in the digital realm, it has yet to fully realize the right to access the internet as a human right in practice, as its actions often conflict with international human rights standards, particularly regarding freedom of expression and access to information.

Uganda has taken steps toward improving internet access, particularly through the Data Protection Regulations, 2021, which provide legal protection for privacy and personal data in the digital realm. These regulations aim to regulate the collection, storage, and processing of personal data, which is essential for upholding individuals’ rights to privacy, as guaranteed under Article 27 of the Ugandan Constitution. The Data Protection Regulations align with international standards set by the African

Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection (2014) and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Nevertheless, the enforcement of these provisions remains weak, and data privacy violations continue to be reported, with little to no legal recourse for victims. The case of Asege Winnie V Opportunity Bank and Maad Limited,^[12] where a defendant was ordered to compensate a victim for invasion of privacy, highlights the growing need for stronger enforcement mechanisms to safeguard citizens’ rights in the digital world. While these legal frameworks show potential in addressing privacy concerns, Uganda has yet to fully realize the right to internet access as a human right, particularly in terms of affordability, non-discriminatory access, and ensuring that online freedoms are not hindered by state overreach.

The Uganda Communications Act, which established the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC), has played a central role in regulating the telecommunications sector. However, the Act’s provisions, particularly Section 5(1)(b), which grants the UCC extensive discretion, have raised concerns about the potential for arbitrary internet restrictions. The Act allows the government to restrict internet access, violating international human rights standards. The 2021 general elections saw the UCC impose an internet shutdown, highlighting the tension between Uganda’s security concerns and the international commitment to upholding digital rights as human rights. In Muwanga Kivumbi v. Attorney General,^[13] the Constitutional Court ruled against arbitrary limitations on fundamental rights, emphasizing that such restrictions must be justified and proportionate. Despite this ruling, Uganda’s government has continued to impose internet shutdowns, undermining the constitutional protection of freedom of expression and the right to access information. This illustrates the gap between Uganda’s legal commitments to protect human rights and the ongoing state practice of restricting internet access, particularly during politically sensitive periods. The court’s ruling in Muwanga Kivumbi highlights the need for a more comprehensive and balanced approach to digital rights, ensuring that internet restrictions are narrowly tailored and consistent with both national and international human rights obligations. The ongoing use of internet shutdowns reflects the challenge of aligning Uganda’s legal framework with international human rights standards, particularly regarding access to the internet as a fundamental human right.

Uganda’s regulatory framework for the internet, while designed to promote connectivity and digital inclusion, has raised significant concerns regarding online censorship and the suppression of freedom of expression. Section 3 of the Computer Misuse Act further compounds the concerns over internet freedom in Uganda. While the law aims to regulate online conduct, it criminalizes certain forms of online speech, including the spreading of false information. This provision has often been used by the government to silence political dissent and control online criticism, especially during periods of heightened political tension. The heavy penalties for offenses such as unauthorized access to computer data and the modification of computer material under Sections 13-18 of the Computer Misuse Act serve as a deterrent but also have the potential to stifle free expression. The maximum penalties of 10 to 15 years imprisonment for violations under this Act could discourage individuals from freely engaging in online speech and accessing information, raising significant concerns about the chilling effects of the law on Uganda’s internet landscape. These restrictions further undermine Uganda’s commitment to recognizing the internet as a human right, as citizens may be dissuaded from exercising their rights online due to fear of legal consequences.

In addition to the content regulation imposed by the Uganda Communications Act and the Computer Misuse

Act, the legal framework in Uganda also includes provisions for surveillance and data protection.

Sections 9 and 11 of the Computer Misuse Act empower investigative officers to apply for orders for the preservation of data, which can include data interception and seizure of computer materials While these provisions are intended to safeguard against cybercrime and ensure security, they may interfere with individuals’ right to privacy, as guaranteed by Article 27 of Uganda’s Constitution. The ability to order searches and seizures, albeit with a magistrate’s approval, can encroach on the privacy of individuals, especially if applied indiscriminately. In cases such as Uganda v. Sentongo & 4 Others,^[14] the courts have interpreted the provisions of the Computer Misuse Act concerning unauthorized disclosure of access codes, reinforcing the need for strict legal boundaries around the use of personal data. However, this balance between protecting individuals from cybercrimes and maintaining the right to privacy is precarious, as seen in surveillance practices that sometimes extend to politically motivated online actions. Thus, while

Uganda’s legal framework theoretically supports the regulation of the Internet, its implementation has often been inconsistent with the fundamental human right to access information and engage in free expression.

Uganda’s commitment to recognizing access to the Internet as a fundamental right is challenged by the uneven implementation of initiatives aimed at promoting digital literacy and empowerment. The

National Information Technology Authority of Uganda (NITA-U) has taken steps to promote digital skills across the country, but these efforts remain insufficient, particularly in rural areas

where access to the internet and digital education is limited. Andrew Partridge, in his article

“Internet Usage Trends in Uganda,”^[15] notes that the lack of a comprehensive, nationwide digital literacy strategy exacerbates the digital divide between urban and rural populations, leaving many Ugandans unable to fully leverage the internet for education, health, business, and social empowerment. While NITA-

U’s initiatives, such as promoting e-government and e-commerce, are commendable, their impact is not evenly distributed across the population. This gap in digital literacy indicates that Uganda has not yet fully realized its commitment to ensuring that all citizens have equal and meaningful access to the Internet, particularly in a manner that empowers them to use digital platforms effectively.

Moreover, the absence of a comprehensive digital literacy policy also impacts the broader regulatory environment in Uganda, where laws such as the National Information Technology Act, which governs the functions of NITA-U, have been largely focused on data management and security rather than improving digital skills among the general population. While the Act grants NITA-U significant powers to regulate data standards, monitor information technology systems, and promote e-government, its focus on infrastructure and technical regulation has not been complemented by parallel efforts to equip citizens with the skills needed to utilize the Internet effectively. Section 19 of the National Information Technology Act, which allows NITA-U to conduct surveys and collect data related to information technology, highlights the authority’s focus on regulatory functions but does little to address the urgent need for widespread digital literacy programs. The lack of a clear strategy to address this gap in digital education limits the full realization of internet access as a human right in Uganda, as it leaves large portions of the population unable to take advantage of the digital opportunities available to them.

In addition, the regulatory environment governing digital technologies and data protection in Uganda has also been critiqued for its emphasis on surveillance and control rather than empowerment. The Ministry

of Information and Communications Technology’s National Information Security

Strategy highlights the government’s interest in protecting data and securing digital infrastructures.

However, much of the strategy’s focus is on developing mechanisms for protecting the government and businesses from cyber threats, with a limited focus on citizens’ rights to digital literacy and privacy. The establishment of national computer incident response teams and other protective measures shows a recognition of the importance of securing digital spaces, but without parallel efforts to ensure that citizens have the skills to navigate these spaces safely, the government’s efforts do not fully address the right to access the internet in a meaningful way. In Uganda v. Garuhanga and Mugerwa,^[16] for instance, the lack of enabling laws to govern computer data manipulation was highlighted, showing that while Uganda has made strides in regulating digital security, it still lags in providing comprehensive legal frameworks to support citizens’ rights to access and use the internet effectively. These actions run counter to the spirit of Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees freedom of expression, including the right to seek, receive, and impart information through any media. Thus, Uganda’s online platform shutdowns and restrictions highlight the conflict between state regulation and individual internet access rights, undermining Uganda’s commitment to internet freedom as a human right. This highlights the need for a more inclusive approach.

The Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) plays a significant role in Uganda’s regulatory framework concerning internet access, data protection, and electronic communications. By providing a clear structure for the use and regulation of electronic records, the ETA establishes legal certainty for online transactions and communications. However, one of the provisions that could threaten internet freedom is Section 29 of the ETA, which exempts internet service providers (ISPs) from liability concerning third-party content. While this is intended to protect service providers from being held responsible for the actions of users, it also opens the door for potential overreach in removing content. Specifically, the provision allows ISPs to take down material upon request without a court order if they consider the content unlawful. This practice, while intended to prevent the spread of illegal material, raises concerns about censorship and the stifling of free speech. It allows individuals to request the removal of content they deem inappropriate without a judicial review, which can have a chilling effect on the exercise of freedom of expression online. This provision undermines the right to internet access by granting disproportionate power to private entities, potentially leading to the suppression of legitimate online discourse.

Concerning Uganda’s recognition of internet access as a fundamental right, the ETA, while providing a regulatory framework for digital communications, reflects a more restrictive stance that could limit freedom

of expression. In Hansa & Lyoyds, Emmanuel Onyango vs Aya Investments Ltd, Mohammad Hamid,^[17] the High Court of Uganda recognized email exchanges as evidence in determining contractual obligations, reflecting the growing importance of electronic communication. However, the subsequent enactment of the ETA in 2011 placed legal constraints on digital rights, as seen in Section 30, which shields service providers from liability for linking users to infringing content. This lack of judicial oversight in the removal of content aligns with concerns over limiting access to information. The absence of a requirement for a court order to take down potentially unlawful content suggests a conflict between digital security and the fundamental right to access information, as enshrined in international human rights law, such as Article 19 of the ICCPR. Therefore, although the ETA aims to regulate the digital space and protect data privacy, its provisions, especially those concerning content removal, suggest that Uganda may not fully guarantee access to the internet as an unconditional right, undermining both free speech and the broader goal of equitable access to information.

Conclusion

Uganda has made significant strides in recognizing the right to access the internet as a human right, particularly through its constitutional and legal commitments to freedom of information and privacy.

However, the government’s actions, including internet shutdowns, restrictive laws, and the high cost of internet access, have hindered the full realization of this right. While there have been legal advancements in data protection and privacy, these laws have not been effectively enforced, and many Ugandans continue to face barriers to affordable and unrestricted internet access. To truly realize the right to Internet access, Uganda must address these challenges, ensure judicial oversight, and focus on making the Internet both affordable and accessible for all citizens while safeguarding their digital rights from government overreach and exploitation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Laws and Statutes

1. The 1995 Constitution of Uganda
2. The Data Protection and Privacy Act, Cap 97
3. The Data Protection and Privacy Regulations
4. The Penal Code Act, Cap 128
5. The National Information Technology Authority, Uganda Act, Cap 200
6. The Electronic Signatures Act, Cap 98
7. The Computer Misuse Act, Cap 96
8. The Electronic Transactions Act, Cap 99
9. The Uganda Communications Act, Cap 103
10. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
11. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
12. The European Convention on Human Rights
13. The African Declaration on Internet Rights and Freedoms

Books and Articles

1. David Bainbridge, Introduction to Computer Law, 3^rd Edition
2. Çalı, B. (2020). The case for the right to meaningful access to the internet is a human right in international law. In A. Von Arnauld, K. Von der Decken, & M. Susi (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of New Human Rights: Recognition, Novelty, Rhetoric (pp. 276-283). Cambridge University Press.
3. Christiano, T. (2021). An instrumental argument for a human right to democracy. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 39(2), 142-176.
4. De Hert, P., & Kloza, D. (2012). Internet (access) as a new fundamental right: Inflating the current rights framework? European Journal of Law and Technology, 3(3).
5. Amnesty International. (2020). Amnesty International Togo and Others v. The Togolese Republic ECW/CCJ/JUD/09/20.
6. Hate Speech: European Courts on Human Rights. (2016). European Courts on Human Rights, 1.
7. Partridge, A. (2023). Internet usage trends in Uganda. After Access 2022 Policy Brief, 2/2023. Research ICT Africa. Retrieved from https://researchictafrica.net/publication/after–access–2022internet–usage–trends–in–uganda/
8. Tushabe, F., & Baryamureeba, V. (2005). Cybercrime in Uganda: Myth or reality? Proceedings of the World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 8.
9. UNHRC. (2012). Resolution A/HRC/20/L.13.
10. Kimumwe, P. (2020). Media Regulation and Practice in Uganda: A Journalists Handbook, 2^nd ed. https://www.scribd.com/document/226805466/Media–Regulation–and–Practice–in–Uganda–AJournalists–Handbook
11. Joseph Migga Kizza, “Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age,” Second Edition, Springer, 2003.
12. Boda Mash, “International Law and Cybercrime” Paper presented at a seminar on Cyber Liability, 25 – 26th November 2002, Pune, India.

[1] Partridge, A. After Access 2022: Internet usage trends in Uganda. After Access 2022 Policy Brief no. 2/2023. Research ICT Africa. (2023), https://researchictafrica.net/publication/after–access–2022–internet–usage–trends–in–uganda/ ² UNHRC, ‘Resolution A/HRC/20/L.13’ (2012).

[2] B Çalı, ‘The Case for the Right to Meaningful Access to the Internet as a Human Right in International Law’ in A Von Arnauld, K Von der Decken and M Susi (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of New Human Rights: Recognition, Novelty, Rhetoric (Cambridge University Press, 2020) 276-283.

[3] Florence Tushabe and Baryamureeba Venansius, Cyber Crime in Uganda: Myth or Reality?, Proceedings of the World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2005, Volume 8.

[4] Civil Suit No. 93 of 2014

[5] Hate speech: European Courts on Human Rights, 2016, Pg 1. 

[6] P De Hert and D Kloza, ‘Internet (Access) as a New Fundamental Right: Inflating the Current Rights Framework?’ (2012) 3(3) European Journal of Law and Technology. ⁸ CIVIL SUIT NO. 156 OF 2009

[7] Andrew Karamagi & Robert Shaka v. Attorney General, Constitutional Petition No. 5 of 2016.

[8] T Christiano, ‘An Instrumental Argument for a Human Right to Democracy’ (2021) 39(2) Philosophy & Public Affairs 142-176.

[9] Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) AIR SC 1308.

[10] Amnesty International Togo and Ors v. The Togolese Republic ECW/CCJ/JUD/09/20.

[11] Constitutional Petition No. 5/2019.

[12] High Court Commercial Division 756 of 2013.

[13] Muwanga Kivumbi v. Attorney General, Constitutional Petition No. 9 of 2005.

[14] CRIMINAL SESSION CASE 123 OF 2012

[15] Andrew Partridge, Internet Usage Trends in Uganda (Policy Brief, 7 February 2023).

[16] CA No. 17 of 2004

[17] HCT-00-CC-CS-857-2007[2010] UGCOMMC 20