Protest, social media and digital technologies

The fizzling  anti-hunger protests across the north and some south west states of the country have been publicised, and arguably facilitated largely, by social media and other communication technologies. The protests, #EndBadGovernance or Hunger Protest, began in the country on Thursday and have since left some Nigerians dead while many government facilities had been damaged. […]

The fizzling  anti-hunger protests across the north and some south west states of the country have been publicised, and arguably facilitated largely, by social media and other communication technologies.

The protests, #EndBadGovernance or Hunger Protest, began in the country on Thursday and have since left some Nigerians dead while many government facilities had been damaged. One of the vandalised government’s facilities was the Digital Complex in Kano, Kano state.  

The protesters were showing their level of dissatisfaction with the government, especially on its handling of the economy. 

Earlier, youth protesters had shared logistical information about when, where, and how  protests would occur using social media and digital technology tools.  This has increased the ‘traffic’ on the country’s ‘internet road’ slowing down the movement of data and works on the internet in many parts of the country.

• We’re ready to pay N70,000 minimum wage – Nasarawa govt
• Nigerians in Americas urge N/ Assembly to support diaspora voting

The telecom operators and NCC, the country’s telecom regulatory authority, have been at the receiving end. Not few Nigerians blamed them for the slow internet speed since the protest started. They have denied this. NCC and telcos said the slow internet was due to heavy usage at the same time.   

However, a report examining the impact of new technologies on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of assemblies, including peaceful protests, published by the United Nations had cautioned state actors against muzzling the use of new technologies during peaceful protests. 

The report published in 2020  had noted that bprotests take place  for complex and varied reasons, including in response to structural and racial discrimination and worsening socio-economic conditions.

“Given the importance of the enjoyment of the right of peaceful assembly for democracies, and the role Internet-based technologies can play, it is crucial that States close the digital divide and ensure the greatest number of people possible can get secure, affordable Internet access,” the report said. 

It said states should also avoid resorting to Internet shutdowns, also called “network shutdowns”, “kill switches” or “blackouts,” which the report terms “a particularly pernicious way of interfering with ICT [information and communications technology] and thus also with assemblies.” 

It added that technology-enabled surveillance has been a major factor in the shrinking of civic space in many countries, with States resorting to intrusive online surveillance and the hacking of ICT tools and social media accounts used by those planning or organising protests, as well as of protesters themselves.

One particular aspect detailed in the report is the use of facial recognition technology, which allows for the automated identification, surveillance and tracking of protesters.

The report note that many people feel discouraged from demonstrating in public places and freely expressing their views when they fear they could be identified and suffer negative consequences. Moreover, facial recognition technology may also perpetuate and amplify discrimination.

The report urges States to avoid the use of facial recognition technology to identify those peacefully participating in an assembly, and to refrain from recording footage of protesters unless there are concrete indications participants are engaging in, or will engage in, criminal activity. 

There should be a moratorium on the use of facial recognition technology in the context of peaceful protests, until States meet certain conditions including human rights due diligence before deploying it. These include effective, independent oversight of its use; strict privacy and data protection laws; and full transparency about the use of image recordings and facial recognition technology in the context of assemblies.

The report also details the responsibility of private companies to carry out human rights due diligence, in particular to ensure that data protection and non-discrimination requirements are included in the design and implementation of these technologies.

The use of other new technologies, specifically less-lethal weapons and ammunition, is also examined in the report. While batons, pepper spray and tear gas have been used by law enforcement officials for many decades, advances in technology have led to the development of new types of less-lethal weapons and ammunition that are used to crack down on protesters. These include conducted electrical weapons such as “Tasers”, advanced kinetic impact projectiles, pepper balls and pepper ball launchers, acoustic weapons and drones and autonomous systems that deploy tear gas.