By Burnett Munthali
A growing concern about the balance between digital security and human rights has emerged in Malawi, with the Net Rights Coalition (NRC), a pan-African group of internet freedom activists, raising strong objections against the Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority (Macra) over its plans to procure a $1.5 million (K2.6 billion) system designed to combat misinformation and disinformation on digital platforms. The controversial move has sparked a heated debate over the potential risks it poses to privacy, freedom of expression, and the right to access information.
In an open letter addressed to Macra’s director general, Daud Suleman, on January 27, 2025, the NRC expressed deep concerns over the procurement of what it described as “surveillance technologies.” The coalition argues that such systems, while potentially effective in addressing the spread of harmful content online, pose significant risks to fundamental human rights. These concerns are particularly relevant given the increasing global debate about privacy and the need to safeguard individual freedoms in an era of heightened surveillance.
The crux of the NRC’s argument lies in the potential erosion of privacy and freedom of expression. While the Malawian government has justified the system’s procurement as a measure to curb misinformation and disinformation—issues that have increasingly plagued digital spaces—the coalition warns that such technologies often come with serious implications for human rights. Surveillance systems capable of monitoring online activity could be misused, stifling dissent, limiting free speech, and enabling unwarranted government control over digital communications.
The letter from the NRC calls for greater transparency in the procurement process and a comprehensive review of its potential human rights impact. The coalition specifically demands clarity on key issues such as:
The Scope of the Contract: What exactly will the $1.5 million system entail in terms of its capabilities and limitations? How broad is the surveillance coverage, and what specific activities will be monitored?
Selection Criteria for the Bidders: Who is being considered for the contract, and on what basis? There is a growing demand for transparency in the selection of companies involved in providing such sensitive technologies.
Judicial Oversight: Has there been any judicial review or oversight in the procurement process, particularly considering the implications of this technology on the privacy of citizens? The NRC is urging that such a significant purchase undergo rigorous scrutiny to ensure that it does not overreach its intended purpose.
Human Rights Impact Assessment: Has there been any formal evaluation of the potential human rights consequences of implementing such surveillance technologies? The NRC emphasizes the need for a thorough human rights impact assessment to gauge the risks involved.
The coalition also stresses the need for broader stakeholder engagement to discuss the necessity of such measures and to ensure that citizens’ concerns are heard. The open letter highlights that technologies like this should not be deployed without broader discussions involving civil society organizations, digital rights defenders, and the general public. Such engagements, according to the NRC, would ensure that the rights of individuals are safeguarded while still addressing the problem of online misinformation and disinformation.
The NRC is not acting in isolation; it is part of a broader movement of digital rights organizations from across Africa, including groups like Accountability Lab from Nigeria, the African Internet Rights Alliance, and the Media Council of Malawi. The diverse coalition represents a wide range of stakeholders concerned with the intersection of technology, human rights, and governance.
These groups believe that while addressing misinformation is important, it should not come at the cost of democratic freedoms and digital rights. They argue that misinformation should be combated through transparent, accountable, and rights-respecting policies, rather than through the unchecked implementation of surveillance technologies that could undermine public trust in both the government and the internet itself.
For instance, the African Internet Rights Alliance and Paradigm Initiative have repeatedly highlighted how overreliance on surveillance technologies in African nations has led to greater restrictions on free speech and access to information. Similarly, organizations like the West African Digital Rights Defenders Coalition and the Bloggers of Zambia have pointed to instances where governments have used surveillance as a tool of political repression rather than as a means of protecting citizens from harmful content.
The NRC’s call for a rights-based approach to addressing misinformation is a timely reminder that digital rights must be an integral part of the discussion around online regulation. The coalition’s statement underscores that any measure to combat digital harm must be proportionate, transparent, and subject to robust oversight to prevent abuses of power.
This controversy comes at a time when the Malawian government has increasingly turned to digital platforms to engage citizens and disseminate information. However, there is a growing concern that the same tools that are used for communication and engagement may also be used to monitor and control citizens’ digital activities. This creates a delicate balance for the government, as it seeks to protect national security, preserve public order, and tackle misinformation, while ensuring that fundamental rights are not violated in the process.
Malawi, like many countries in Africa, is still in the early stages of digital transformation, and as such, it faces significant challenges in developing a legal and regulatory framework that safeguards digital freedoms while addressing the realities of the digital age. The call from the NRC for more transparency and a human rights impact assessment reflects the need for Malawi’s digital policy framework to evolve in a manner that prioritizes citizens’ rights, as well as the need for robust accountability mechanisms.
The Net Rights Coalition’s intervention in the matter of the $1.5 million surveillance system highlights the broader concerns about digital rights and privacy that are becoming central to public discourse in Malawi and across Africa. As governments increasingly turn to technology to solve complex social and political challenges, it is critical that these solutions do not infringe on citizens’ rights to free expression, privacy, and access to information.
Malawi now faces a crucial decision: whether to proceed with its procurement of surveillance technologies without the scrutiny and safeguards recommended by the NRC or to engage in an open dialogue that ensures these technologies are used responsibly, transparently, and in accordance with international human rights standards. The outcome of this debate will not only shape Malawi’s digital future but also set a precedent for the rest of the continent as it grapples with the complexities of digital governance in the 21st century.
