Transactions Act 2002,
80
and 2) it established an
Australia-like jurisdictional rule for Internet
defamation cases in which publication occurs
where the material is experienced. 81 Even though
the material was hosted by an ISP in Cape Town,
the case was held in the Johannesburg High
Court. 82
One incidence of Internet filtering found in
the region was based on defamation in the leadup to the Ugandan presidential and parliamentary elections on February 23, 2006. On February
16, the government ordered all of the country’s
ISPs to block the Web site of Radio Katwe, where
a user had posted criticism of President
Museveni. In addition, on February 18, the government ordered a temporary block on The
Monitor, an independent daily, though the exact
reasoning for the block is unknown. The ISPs
complied in both cases, making the sites inaccessible. 83
In Senegal the French national Christian
Costeaux in 2004 was sentenced in absentia to a
year in prison and fined 600 million CFA francs
(USD1.2 million) 84 for posting an allegedly
defamatory article on his tourism Web site
www.senegalaisement.com from the Senegalese
newspaper Walfadjiri that accused aides of the
mayor of Ziguinchor of embezzling more than
100 million CFA francs (USD200,000). The site,
however, was never blocked. 85
Finally, in Zimbabwe the government has
been cracking down on criminal defamation and
insult transmitted by e-mail. In 2005 authorities
arrested forty people in a raid on a local Internet
café because an e-mail insulting President
Robert Mugabe was allegedly sent from the
location. 86
Overall only a small number of countries in
the region have begun to apply defamation and
insult laws to the Internet. However, as the
Internet spreads across the region, there is no
reason to doubt that an increasing number of
countries will also come to apply their laws to the
Internet, as has occurred in the rest of the world.
Political opposition
Though one could imagine other countries in the
region doing the same, Ethiopia is so far the only
country in sub-Saharan Africa to actively engage
in political Internet filtering. ONI research has
found that Ethiopia focuses its filtering primarily
on political bloggers with oppositional views by
blocking two major blog services, blogspot.com
and nazret.com. This blanket ban of these blogging domains results in extraordinary overblocking, filtering thousands of Weblogs that have no
relevance to politics or Ethiopia. In addition, the
government blocks Web sites of opposition parties, sites representing ethnic minorities, sites for
independent news organizations, and sites promoting human rights in Ethiopia. 87
Ethiopia’s Internet penetration rate of 0.2
percent
88
is the lowest rate of any country that
ONI has identified as implementing an active
Internet filtration regime. Other countries such as
Zimbabwe, which have higher rates of Internet
usage and similarly repressive regimes, filter neither political nor any other content. One possible
explanation is location. Ethiopia’s proximity to the
heavily filtering Middle East and North Africa
(MENA) region may influence its decision making
on the subject. Whatever the reason, it is striking
that a country with such a small population of
Internet users would choose to implement an
Internet content filtration regime.
As the Internet spreads, there is likely to be
a convergence between the regulation of traditional media and the Internet, with countries in
the region enacting restrictions on political content online, as they already do offline. This may
well take the form of Internet filtration, as it has in
many of the other countries which ONI has studied.
Security
Despite limited Internet access in the region, a
number of countries have implemented Internet
security policies to increase communication
interception abilities and curb illegal online
218
Regional Overviews
80
and 2) it established an
Australia-like jurisdictional rule for Internet
defamation cases in which publication occurs
where the material is experienced. 81 Even though
the material was hosted by an ISP in Cape Town,
the case was held in the Johannesburg High
Court. 82
One incidence of Internet filtering found in
the region was based on defamation in the leadup to the Ugandan presidential and parliamentary elections on February 23, 2006. On February
16, the government ordered all of the country’s
ISPs to block the Web site of Radio Katwe, where
a user had posted criticism of President
Museveni. In addition, on February 18, the government ordered a temporary block on The
Monitor, an independent daily, though the exact
reasoning for the block is unknown. The ISPs
complied in both cases, making the sites inaccessible. 83
In Senegal the French national Christian
Costeaux in 2004 was sentenced in absentia to a
year in prison and fined 600 million CFA francs
(USD1.2 million) 84 for posting an allegedly
defamatory article on his tourism Web site
www.senegalaisement.com from the Senegalese
newspaper Walfadjiri that accused aides of the
mayor of Ziguinchor of embezzling more than
100 million CFA francs (USD200,000). The site,
however, was never blocked. 85
Finally, in Zimbabwe the government has
been cracking down on criminal defamation and
insult transmitted by e-mail. In 2005 authorities
arrested forty people in a raid on a local Internet
café because an e-mail insulting President
Robert Mugabe was allegedly sent from the
location. 86
Overall only a small number of countries in
the region have begun to apply defamation and
insult laws to the Internet. However, as the
Internet spreads across the region, there is no
reason to doubt that an increasing number of
countries will also come to apply their laws to the
Internet, as has occurred in the rest of the world.
Political opposition
Though one could imagine other countries in the
region doing the same, Ethiopia is so far the only
country in sub-Saharan Africa to actively engage
in political Internet filtering. ONI research has
found that Ethiopia focuses its filtering primarily
on political bloggers with oppositional views by
blocking two major blog services, blogspot.com
and nazret.com. This blanket ban of these blogging domains results in extraordinary overblocking, filtering thousands of Weblogs that have no
relevance to politics or Ethiopia. In addition, the
government blocks Web sites of opposition parties, sites representing ethnic minorities, sites for
independent news organizations, and sites promoting human rights in Ethiopia. 87
Ethiopia’s Internet penetration rate of 0.2
percent
88
is the lowest rate of any country that
ONI has identified as implementing an active
Internet filtration regime. Other countries such as
Zimbabwe, which have higher rates of Internet
usage and similarly repressive regimes, filter neither political nor any other content. One possible
explanation is location. Ethiopia’s proximity to the
heavily filtering Middle East and North Africa
(MENA) region may influence its decision making
on the subject. Whatever the reason, it is striking
that a country with such a small population of
Internet users would choose to implement an
Internet content filtration regime.
As the Internet spreads, there is likely to be
a convergence between the regulation of traditional media and the Internet, with countries in
the region enacting restrictions on political content online, as they already do offline. This may
well take the form of Internet filtration, as it has in
many of the other countries which ONI has studied.
Security
Despite limited Internet access in the region, a
number of countries have implemented Internet
security policies to increase communication
interception abilities and curb illegal online
218
Regional Overviews