DSpace Institution DSpace Repository http://dspace.org
Law Thesis and Dissertations
2019-06 THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN SOCIAL MEDIA AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN ETHIOPIA
WONDWOSSEN, MESFIN http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/9582 Downloaded from DSpace Repository, DSpace Institution's institutional repository
THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN SOCIAL MEDIA AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN ETHIOPIA
MESFIN WONDWOSSEN ABBI
School of Law,
Bahir Dar University June, 2019
THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN SOCIAL MEDIA AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN ETHIOPIA
Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Laws (LLM) at the School of Law, Bahir Dar University
By Mesfin Wondwossen Abbi
Advisor Tessema Simachew (PhD)
School of Law, Bahir Dar University
June, 2019
ii
Thesis Approval Page
The thesis titled “The interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia” by Mr. Mesfin Wondwossen Abbi is approved for the degree of Master of Laws (LLM)
Board of Examiners
Name Signature
Advisor ______
Internal Examiner ______
External Examiner ______
Date: ______
iii
Declaration I, the undersigned, declare that the thesis comprises my own work. In compliance with widely accepted practices, I have duly acknowledged and referenced all materials used in this work. I understand that non-adherence to the principles of academic honesty and integrity, misrepresentation/fabrication of any idea/data/fact/source will constitute sufficient ground for disciplinary action by the University and can also evoke criminal sanction from the State and civil action from the sources which have not been properly cited or acknowledged. ______Signature ______Name of Student ______University Id. Number ______Date
iv
Acknowledgement First and foremost, praises be to the Almighty for he shields the weak with his omnipotence! In the course of conducting this paper, lot of persons supported me with their comments and encouragements. Hence, I am deeply grateful to my advisor, Dr. Tessema, and my interviewees. I am also thankful to all my families. I would particularly like to thank Wondwossen, Emeye, Almaz and Mable – for everything they did to me. My friends, especially Birhanu, Fuad, Jambo and Yilkal, and also my schoolmates, Getch, Sale, Habte, Gashanew, Moke, Jossy and the rest of you – “I thank You”.
v
Table of Contents
Thesis Approval Page ...... iii
Declaration ...... iv
Acknowledgement ...... v
Table of Contents ...... vi
List of Acronyms ...... ix
Abstract ...... x
Chapter One ...... 1
1. Introduction ...... 1
1.1. Background of the Study ...... 1
1.2. Statement of the Problem ...... 2
1.3. Objective of the Study ...... 3
1.3.1. General Objectives ...... 3
1.3.2. Specific Objectives ...... 3
1.4. Research Questions ...... 4
1.4.1. General Question/s ...... 4
1.4.2. Specific Questions ...... 4
1.5. Scope of the Study...... 4
1.6. Significance of the study ...... 5
1.7. Methodology ...... 5
1.8. Limitation of the Study ...... 6
1.9. Organization of the thesis ...... 7
Chapter Two...... 7
2. General Overview of Social Media, Its Protection and Regulation from Human Rights Perspective ...... 7
vi
Introduction ...... 7
2.1. Social Media in General ...... 8
2.1.1. The Meaning of Social Media ...... 8
2.1.2. Types of social media ...... 9
2.1.3. Nature and features of social media ...... 10
2.2. The conceptual, moral and/or legal basis of the freedom of using the social media 11
2.3. The Regulation of Social Media and Human Rights Concerns ...... 15
Conclusion ...... 18
Chapter Three...... 19
3. Human Rights and Social Media: an assessment of the international Experience ...... 19
3.1. The Growing Impacts of Social Media on Human Rights ...... 19
3.1.1. The Positive Impacts of Social Media on Human Rights ...... 20
3.1.1. The Negative Impacts of Social Media on Human Rights ...... 24
3.2. Brief Account of International Experiences Demonstrating the Two Sided Impacts of Social Media on Human Rights ...... 29
3.2.1. Social Media as a Blessing to Human Rights ...... 30
3.2.2. Social Media as a „Curse‟ to Human Rights ...... 32
Conclusion ...... 36
Chapter Four ...... 37
4. The Case of Ethiopia ...... 37
4.1.1. General Overview of Social Media Use in Ethiopia ...... 37
4.2. The Interplay between Social Media and Human Rights in Ethiopia ...... 38
4.2.1. Exercising Human Rights through Social Media ...... 39
4.2.2. Promoting Human Rights through Social Media ...... 47
4.2.3. The Instrumentality of the social media in Abusing/Violating Human Rights . 54
4.3. The Regulation of Social Media in Ethiopia and Important Human Rights Concerns 59 vii
4.3.1. The Ethiopian government approach towards social media: before and after the „reform‟ 59
4.3.2. The necessity or otherwise of regulating social media in Ethiopia ...... 62
4.3.3. How far does the draft bill go to respond to the social media‟s adverse impacts on human rights? ...... 64
Chapter Five ...... 70
5. Conclusion and Recommendations ...... 70
5.1. Conclusion ...... 70
5.2. Recommendations ...... 75
Bibliography ......
viii
List of Acronyms
ACHPR African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights
ACHR American Convention on Human Rights
APC Association for Progressive Communications
Art. Article
ECHR European Convention on Human Rights
ECtHR European Court of Human Rights
FDRE Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
HRC Human Rights Committee
ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
OAS Organization of American States
OAU Organization of African Unity
OHCHR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Para Paragraph
UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights
UN United Nations
ix
Abstract Social media is an essential part of life in the modern age which has managed to create a virtually interconnected world of communication. Hence, it is affecting countries‟ politics, economy, culture, academy, religion, lifestyles, etc. in the present day world. Likewise, its ever-growing impacts are knocking the doors of legal systems across the globe by triggering important legal concerns including that of human rights. Hence, speaking globally, the interplay between social media and human rights is increasingly becoming a focal point of researches and debates. In Ethiopia, despite the absence of a well refined body of research on the topic, there has been growing controversies on, inter alia, the social media‟s impacts on human rights and the necessity or otherwise of regulating it especially after the government announced its plan to regulate social media activities. The fact that these discussions and deliberations are oftentimes made based on political motivations, preconceptions and prejudices rendered the subject obscure despite the intriguing nature of the questions it involves. Hence, this study attempts to fill the gap in the existing body of knowledge by assessing the interplay between social media and human rights in the country. Having explored and analyzed wide area of doctrines, experiences, perspectives and trends that surround the topic both at the international and the national contexts on the basis of data collected through document analyses, interview, observation, social media contents analyses and visual analyses, this study makes the case that social media‟s impacts on human rights in Ethiopia are threefold – i) it underpins the enjoyment of human rights; ii) it buttresses the promotion of human rights; and, iii) it serves as a tool of human rights violation/abuse. Furthermore, this study contends that the regulation of social media activities (particularly, hate speech and false information) is justifiable on account of the state‟s duty to protect and individuals‟ obligation to respect human rights– stressing, however, that such move towards enacting a law should be backed by some additional measures. Hence, this study urges on the state to work on seeking political solutions to settle root causes of problems; enhance cooperation with social media companies; and, raise users‟ digital literacy so as to mitigate the social media‟s adverse impacts on human rights and maintain its positive contributions in the long run.
x
CHAPTER ONE
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Study Social media tools, internet based programs of virtual communication that are available on computers and mobile phones,1 are essential parts of life in the information age. They have come to dominate every area of life so much so that their overstretching hands go from shaping individuals‟ life styles to influencing states‟ political cultures.2 In that, they managed to affect and be integral parts of the present day businesses, politics, academy, culture, fashion, religion, lifestyle, among others.3 For this reason, these online platforms are said to play a „one-stop-shop‟ role in peoples‟ lives across the globe.4
Given the ever-growing impacts of social media tools in every area of life, it is no wonder that these channels also affect human rights and human rights protection. Oftentimes, social media and human rights affect one another; and, their interrelation does have both positive and negative sides.5 To the extent that these internet-based communication tools may be used to contribute to human rights, they may also be used to pursue human rights unfriendly ends. The involvement of several stakeholders in the field – including governments, social media companies and users – has an immense role in shaping the interplay between social media and human rights.6 Several writers all over the world have produced different publications that aim to show the interaction of social media and human rights from various perspectives.
In Ethiopia, there is growing access to internet and social media. Millions use social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to pursue different ends.7 Hence, the impacts of social media use in Ethiopia are now becoming concerns of the government, the
1 Collins English Dictionary, 13th ed., S.V. “Social media” 2 Sileshie S. Kumlachew, „Understanding Social Media and Its Potentials‟, Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2014, Vol. 4, No. 3, PP. 203-214, at P. 205-206 [Herein after, Sileshi, Understanding Social Media and its Potential] 3 Gabrielle Byrd, “Does Freedom of Speech Exist on Social Media” at
In recent times, the government has shown interest to regulate social media activities.13 And, this has led many to raise important human rights concerns.14 Accordingly, there have emerged countervailing positions that diverge on answering what social media actually brought to the Ethiopian human rights environment and pointing the proper way of dealing with it. With this background in mind, the researcher found it necessary to conduct a study that scrutinizes the interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia on the basis of which recommendations could be forwarded as to how the state should approach social media.
1.2. Statement of the Problem Social media use in Ethiopia, as is the case in other states, involves state and non-state actors. Ethiopia, as a state, bears the duty to respect, protect and fulfill human rights. Non-state actors, which in this case include social media companies and individual users, are also under duty to respect human rights by virtue of article 9 (2) of the FDRE Constitution.15 Given the social media‟s growing penetration and impact in Ethiopia, the triangular interrelation of
8 Al Jazeera, “How social media shaped calls for political change in Ethiopia”, at
Even though the social media‟s impact on human rights is uncontestable, there is no consensus as to the nature of such impacts. This, among others, stems from the absence of a comprehensive assessment of the subject in light of the Ethiopian context. Even if there are some dispersed efforts, they often lack comprehensiveness; suffer from subtlety and overstate a single side of the case. Due to this, for some, social media is a curse to human rights that serves as a safe haven for miscreants to easily violate and/or abuse individuals‟ rights. For others, social media is a blessing that enabled many to enjoy and promote their rights online.
The divergence in opinion relates also to the manner of handling social media – some call for strict regulations while others denounce such approach. Interestingly, concerns of human rights lie at the heart of both lines of arguments. Despite the controversial nature of the matter, the Ethiopian government prepared a draft bill which is believed to target the social media. This research aimed at filling the gap in the existing body of knowledge on the subject by assessing the interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia. It looked into how social media and human rights impact one another by examining the same in light of the roles and duties of human rights actors involved. This way, the researcher hoped to reflect on how the social media should be approached in light of human rights perspectives.
1.3. Objective of the Study
1.3.1. General Objectives The general objective of this research is to examine the interrelation of human rights and social media in Ethiopia by scrutinizing the same in light of state and non-state actors‟ roles and duties.
1.3.2. Specific Objectives In studying the interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia, the researcher aimed to: Examine the conceptual, moral and/or legal basis that establish the freedom of using social media; Highlight the existing discourse on the regulation of social media in light of the channel‟s salient features and the human rights issues involved;
3
Explore the international experience regarding the social media‟s positive and negative impacts on human rights; Analyze how social media affect human rights in Ethiopia in light of the roles and duties of state and non-state actors involved; Study the Ethiopian government‟s approach towards social media; and asses the implication of the same on human rights; Explore and reflect on the existing discourse on the regulation of social media in Ethiopia from human rights perspective.
1.4. Research Questions
1.4.1. General Question/s What interrelations do social media and human rights have in Ethiopia?
1.4.2. Specific Questions What conceptual, moral and/or legal basis does establish the freedom of using social media? Speaking in the global context, what are the human rights concerns that surround the regulation of social media? How do social media platforms affect human rights internationally? How do social media platforms affect human rights in Ethiopia; and, what patterns can be shown? How does the Ethiopian government approach the social media; and what possible implications does such approach have on human rights? Given the roles and duties of state and non-state actors, what would be the right way to deal with social media‟s impact on human rights in the Ethiopian context?
1.5. Scope of the Study It would be of paramount significance if the research could explore the interplay between human rights and social media at broader context like in the international level. Studying the global impact of social media on human rights would yet be better meaningful seen in light of the principle of universalism of human rights. However, for two predominant reasons, the researcher had found it necessary to delimit the scope of the research to a national level. The first reason pertains to the unexamined nature of the national context of the problem. Relatively speaking, the international context has been subjected to several studies and thus,
4 different scholarly publications have been produced assessing how human rights and social media affect/affected each other. Therefore it would be better to resort to the national context which is subject to little or no scrutiny so far. Moreover, the researcher‟s capacity (in terms of expertise, finance, time etc.) was the other reason that justified the delimitation of the scope of the study to a national level. Moreover, emphasis had been made on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, some of the widely used social media outlets in Ethiopia, in order to make the study a concentrated one.
1.6. Significance of the study
The study of the interplay between social media and human rights under the Ethiopian context will have the following significances based on, however, the specific findings that it will come up with:
It will contribute to the country‟s human rights system by divulging general patterns of the interplay between social media and human rights. In that, the study will give insights on how human rights could better benefit from the channel‟s potentials while mitigating its adverse impacts. It backs the state‟s endeavor to realize full respect of human rights by providing it with an analysis of important human rights concerns surrounding the social media. In particular, this study, based on its findings, will benefit the state by showing how it should approach the social media. The study will also hopefully benefit social media users by showing them the channels‟ positive and negative impacts on human rights. Accordingly, they will be alert as to the responsibilities, opportunities and challenges that they are likely to face in their social media lives. It will also be helpful to the academic community by adding up its own contribution to the existing body of knowledge on the topic. It will further ignite other researchers to dig more on the subject by providing them with initial insights.
1.7. Methodology The study of the interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia requires looking into both theoretical and practical cases that surround the topic. For this reason, this study has both doctrinal and non-doctrinal legal research elements. In order to address both doctrinal and non-doctrinal questions, the researcher predominantly relied on qualitative data collection methods. In employing qualitative data collection method, the researcher aimed to
5 explore and critically analyze wide area of doctrines, experiences, perspectives and trends that surround the topic both at the international and the national context. In doing so, typical qualitative data collection methods – document analysis, interview, observation and visual analyses – are employed. The document analysis covered wide areas of materials among which are laws, commentaries, declarations, researches, published and unpublished, reports, news analyses, and so forth.
When it comes to interview, the researcher conducted interview with informants that are chosen on a non-probability sampling technique. Particularly, convenience sampling and purposive sampling have been used in choosing interviewees. The interviewees include human rights activists, bloggers, other social media figures, politicians, mainstream media personnel, FDRE General Attorney public prosecutors who took part in drafting the new bill on false information and hate speech, to state generally. Depending on their experience and expertise, they have been asked different questions most of which are presented in a semi- structured interview format. The researcher also made observation on social media activities particularly on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. Social media contents have been used to substantiate the available data with practical examples on the social media. Moreover, to the extent they make meaningful contribution to the study, broadcasted audiovisual communications such as films and TV have also been used.
The data collected in the aforementioned techniques are analyzed in qualitative data analysis method. The researcher meticulously used the data and solely relied on it to undertake the analysis. In that, efforts have been made to objectively and neutrally carry out the analysis by avoiding prejudgments, prejudices, and biases that surround social media and its impacts.
1.8. Limitation of the Study
The impacts of social media in Ethiopia are seldom addressed, including in the field of human rights. For this reason, discussions and deliberations on social media and its impacts are often based on political motivations, preconceptions and prejudices. This made the effort of data collection burdensome as it was necessary to base the analysis on genuine and impartial data roots. The researcher tried to overcome the problem by adopting objectivity and neutrality as guiding standards in the research methodology.
6
1.9. Organization of the thesis The study is organized into five chapters. The first of such chapters is devoted to the proposal which, inter alia, presents the problem, its backgrounds, the methodology, the objectives and the significances of the study. The second chapter addresses the theoretical and normative aspects of the subject. Accordingly, the chapter presents analysis of the protection and regulation of social media use from human rights perspectives. For this purpose, the first section provides description of the meaning, types, nature and features of social media. The second section highlights the conceptual, moral and/or legal basis of the freedom of using the social media followed by the third section which explores the discourse on the regulation of social media in light of important human rights issues.
The third chapter presents the interplay of social media and human rights in the international context. So, it highlights the positive and negative impacts of the social media under the first section. The second section gives brief account of international experiences that can demonstrate the impacts of social media on human rights. The fourth chapter marks the main theme of the research. It analyzes the interplay between social media and human rights in the Ethiopian context. In doing so, the first section presents brief overview social media use in Ethiopia. The second section, divided in to three subsections, will show how social media contributes to the enjoyment, promotion and violation of human rights. The third section of the chapter addresses the regulation of social media in Ethiopia in light of important human rights concerns. It will also present reflections on the necessity and appropriateness of regulating social media. Finally, the fifth chapter makes up the end of the paper by laying down conclusion and important recommendations.
CHAPTER TWO
2. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF SOCIAL MEDIA, ITS PROTECTION AND REGULATION FROM HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE
Introduction
In order to study the interplay between social media and human rights, first, it would be of paramount importance to touch upon important concepts surrounding the topic. Accordingly, the purpose of this chapter is to present general overview of social media, its protection and regulation in light of human rights issues. In view of this, the first section of the chapter will present social media in general by exploring its meaning, types, natures and features. Under
7 the second section, assessment will be made as to the moral, legal or conceptual foundation of the freedom of using social media. This will be followed by the last section of the chapter which tries to look into the regulation of social media activities in juxtaposition with human rights issues involved.
2.1. Social Media in General Social media is an essential part of life for a large number of people across the world. The fact that it provides users with a variety of choices has made it play “a one stop shop” role in peoples‟ lives.16 For this reason, social media is now a place where individuals and groups spend their resources, including time and finance, to advance their professional career; grow their business; express their opinion; receive and impart information; and do a lot more. Under the upcoming subsections, we will look into the meaning, types, nature and features of social media platforms.
2.1.1. The Meaning of Social Media
Despite the frequent use of the term social media, there seems little understanding of its meaning. For the purpose of this study, we will adopt general and technical definitions of the term which have gotten relative acceptance for being able to comprehensively state the nature and characteristics of the social media. The general and less technical definition of social media provides that “social media comprises primarily internet and mobile phone based tools for sharing and discussing information.”17 It further notes that social media “blends technology, telecommunications, and social interaction and provides a platform to communicate through words, pictures, films, and music.”18 On the other hand, the technical definition of the social media, which is available in many scholarly articles, presents social media as “a group of internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0 and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content.”19
16 Gabrielle Byrd, “Does Freedom of Speech Exist on Social Media” at
For a better understanding of the above definition of social media, it is important to know what “web 2.0” and “user generated contents” are. „Web 2.0‟ refers to the second generation of the World Wide Web which is known for its interactive nature and openness.20 It is “[a] populist version of the web where new tools made it possible for nearly anyone to contribute, regardless of their technical knowledge.”21 In Web 2.0, creation, publication and modification of contents is not left to limited individuals as is the case in web 1.0; the participatory and collaborative nature of web 2.0 allows all users to be creators, publishers or modifiers of online contents.22 On the other hand, User Generated Content refers to “the sum of all ways in which people make use of Social Media.”23 In other words, it refers to online contents that are created by users and made accessible to the public.24 The definition given to it by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is widely used in many scholarly articles and put three important elements for a given content to be considered as User Generated Content: 1st, the content must be made publicly available over the internet; 2nd, it has to reflect a certain amount of creative effort; and, 3rd, it should be created outside of professional routines and practices.25 From this we can infer that social media platforms are forms of media that, because of their technological foundation, feature a participatory engagement of end users. As a result, these channels are forums where an end user can take part in what‟s called “horizontal communication system”26 both as a content creator and addressee.
2.1.2. Types of social media
Even if we frequently use the term „social media‟ in general, there is a distinction among social media tools. According to Shishir Tiwari and Gitanjali Ghosh, there are different categories of social media tools and the notable ones include social networking sites, blogs, micro-blogs, video blogs, wikis, social book marking sites, media sharing tools, etc.27 Facebook, for example, is among the social networking sites that allow users to create networks and use functions like chat, instant messaging, photo sharing, video sharing and
20 Technopedia Online Dictionary, 2019, S.V. “Web 2.0” 21 Ibid 22 Kaplan and Michael, Users of the world unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media, P. 60 23 Id, P.61 24 Ibid 25 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), “Participative Web: User-Created Content”, at < https://www.oecd.org/sti/38393115.pdf>, [Last accessed on April 12 2019], P. 4 26 Cambodian Center for Human Rights, “Best Practices for using Social Media for Human Rights”, at
2.1.3. Nature and features of social media
Social media has distinctive features over the traditional media. This section presents a brief analysis of the nature and features of social media to the extent it is relevant to the study. The first distinctive feature of social media is integration and interactivity.32 Integration can be seen in terms of having different users with different characteristics on one hand and storing and making accessible wide range of information resources on the other.33 It is this feature of the social media that makes many dispersed users around the world with different selves be able to exchange a variety of information on the same platform. The interactive nature of social media, on the other hand, can be seen in terms of the fact that it operates with user generated contents; viz., it enables anyone to publish and access information and react to what others share.34
Social media platforms are also known for their converging and trans-border nature – they are able to connect poles of the globe without any geographical or jurisdictional limit.35 The other important features of social media include time effectiveness, simplicity (it requires
28 Ibid 29 See, Anshula Garg, “Social Media and its dynamics”, at < https://www.slideshare.net/anshulagarg1/social- media-and-its-dynamics>, [Last accessed on April 15 2019] 30 Shishir and Gitanjali, Social Media and Freedom of Speech and Expression: Challenges before the Indian Law, P. 3 31 Anshula Garg, “Social Media and its dynamics”, at < https://www.slideshare.net/anshulagarg1/social-media- and-its-dynamics>, [Last accessed on April 15 2019] 32 Hua Hu and Ding Lin, “Feature Analysis of the Social Media, International Workshop on Computer Science in Sports”, at
2.2. The conceptual, moral and/or legal basis of the freedom of using the social media
The use of internet in general and social media in particular has been associated with individuals‟ right to freedom of expression in many respects. There are also tendencies to portray right to the internet/social media/communication as a freedom by itself. This section highlights the existing discourse on the area.
Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right that has been recognized under several international, regional and national human rights instruments. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights („UDHR‟) provides that “everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression”.37 Under the Declaration, the right is meant to include the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.38
The ICCPR, a covenant which was adopted Eighteen years after the UDHR, recognized the right to freedom of expression in broad terms and stipulated limited circumstances under which the right may be subjected to restriction.39 Sub-articles 2 and 3 of Article 19 of the covenant read:
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.
36 Hua Hu and Ding Lin, “Feature Analysis of the Social Media, International Workshop on Computer Science in Sports”, at
The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.
Other regional instruments such as the African Charter on Human and People‟s Rights (ACHPR),40 the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR),41 and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)42 also recognize the right. Such recognition is reaffirmed by national laws, statutory and case laws, across the world.43 In general, freedom of expression is now among those fundamental human rights that are widely recognized and being promoted.
Does social media use fall under freedom of expression?
Writing about the nature of freedom of expression, Professor Richard Moon noted that “[the right] does not simply protect individual liberty from state interference” and that “… it protects the individual‟s freedom to communicate with others.”44 In the effort to show the social character of the right, he further contended that an individual‟s right to freedom of expression involves participation “in an activity that is deeply social in character that involves socially created languages and the use of community resources.”45 Taking cognizance of the fact that social media has now become a platform for individuals and groups to communicate with each other; one may say that the use of social media falls under the protection of freedom of expression. In fact, there are ample amount of sources, authoritative and persuasive, in support of such position.
40 Organization of African Unity (OAU), African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights ("Banjul Charter"), 27 June 1981, CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982), available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3630.html [accessed 28 June 2019] [Herein after, ACHPR] Art. 9 41 Organization of American States (OAS), American Convention on Human Rights "Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica" (B-32), 22 January 1969, at
The Human Rights Committee, in its general comment no. 34, gave interpretation to article 19 (2) of the ICCPR as follows:
Paragraph 2 protects all forms of expression and the means of their dissemination. Such forms include spoken, written and sign language and such non-verbal expression as images and objects of art. Means of expression include books, newspapers, pamphlets, posters, banners, dress and legal submissions. They include all forms of audio-visual as well as electronic and internet-based modes of expression. [Emphasis added]46
As it is clear from the reading of the above text, it is tenable to hold that online communications have the protection of freedom of expression. Indeed, both the UDHR and ICCPR put the right in a technologically neutral fashion; thus, the right is not necessarily attached to any specific kind of media.47 From this, it follows that freedom of expression applies to any kind of media, old or new, the mainstream media or social media.48
HRC, in its resolution on the Internet and Human Rights, affirmed that “the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online”.49 Most importantly, it underlined the application of freedom of expression online by making reference to article 19 of the UDHR and the ICCPR which provide for the applicability of the right “regardless of frontiers and through any media of one‟s choice.”50 The extension of this can be found under different case laws. 51
Is social media a human right by itself?
Scholars like Jason Tenenbaum are of the opinion that individuals have a general right to access the internet.52 According to them, right to access the internet is a general right the foundations of which can be traced from the ICCPR and the ICESCR.53 Even though it may be argued that the freedom to use social media falls under the right to access internet, if the
46 HRC, „General comment No. 34 on Article 19 (Freedom of Opinion and Expression)‟, 2011, UN Doc CCPR/C/GC/34; para.12 47 Daniel Joyce, “Internet Freedom and Human Rights”, European Journal of International Law, 2015, Vol. 26, No. 2, P. 498 [Herein after, Joyce, Internet Freedom and Human Rights] 48 Ibid 49 HRC, Resolution on the Internet and Human Rights, 2012, A/HRC/RES/20/8, at
According to Brian Christopher Jones, a postdoctoral research fellow at Institutum Iurisprudentiae, the recognition of social media as a human right is distinctive.54 He wrote:
Recognition of social media as a human right is distinctive because of the number of important rights which converge into it: namely, freedom of: association, expression, and information. Firstly, members using social media are participating in an associative right. They have chosen to join particular platforms and have often chosen the friends or followers they interact with on those sites. Some platforms, such as Facebook, even provide groups outside of the “friends” or “followers” users interact with. …Many informal and traditionally formal groups are now based- on social media and interact with members exclusively or in conjunction with their social media accounts. …The cognate expressive and informational components remain vastly important to social media, particularly because these platforms revolve around conversation and information: the opportunity to engage in conversation (i.e., expression) and to have access to the information you choose to follow, is fundamental: these rights are highly valued offline, and there should be no difference in the virtual world.55
Given the practical and legal reality surrounding the topic, it would be hardly possible to hold that there is such thing as right to social media. Indeed, as it is shown in the quoted paragraph, there are different rights that one can exercise on the social media. However, the enjoyment of the said rights on the social media doesn‟t require the existence of the so called right to social media/communication. Since the rights are recognized broadly and in a technologically neutral fashion, their applicability, as they stand now, would give rise to one‟s freedom to enjoy them online or offline. That being the case, the arguments being forwarded otherwise are not things to totally disregard given the growing significance of the internet and social media. To paraphrase Daniel Joyce‟s statements, it is difficult to contend that right to internet, as including social media, has acquired recognition as a right by itself, but there may come time when it may need to have its own category of protection beyond freedom of expression.56In fact, as the purpose of this section is to divulge the conceptual, legal or moral basis of the freedom of using social media; it is out of our concern to deeply get into whether social media has got the status of human right as it stands now.
To sum up, the discourse that we have explored so far has shown us that freedom of expression covers individuals‟ and groups‟ right to seek, receive and impart information on
54 Ibid 55 Ibid 56 Joyce, Internet Freedom and Human Right, see the abstract. 14 the social media. Thus, the legal and/or moral foundation of the freedom of using social media can rest on one‟s entitlement to freedom of expression and its important end goals such as self-development, pursuit of knowledge and finding out the truth. Trying to ground the use of social media on freedom of expression is made as part of the effort to investigate the conceptual/moral and/or legal basis of the freedom of using social media. Thus, it should not be interpreted to create the impression that social media hasn‟t anything to do with other human rights or that its relation with other human rights is loose.
2.3. The Regulation of Social Media and Human Rights Concerns
Despite the fact that social media has exerted a great deal of impact on the present day world, particularly on human rights, there is no consensus on whether its positive impacts outweigh the negative or vice versa. For this reason, it is not uncommon to see people labeling social media in general terms. For some it is “good”, constructive and one that should be protected duly. For others, it is “bad” and destructive which the law should ban or restrict its operation.
Apparently, social media‟s impact is two-sided.57 In as much as it allows individuals to exercise and promote their rights, it has also become a tool through which direct and in-direct human rights violations are perpetrated. While some scholars call it „democracy enabling‟ owing to its positive contributions; others labeled it „right infringing‟ considering its negative impact on individuals‟ rights.58
Be that as it may, social media is now triggering important legal concerns.59 According to Article 19‟s brief, “in recent years, there has been an increase in calls globally for greater regulation of social media platforms”.60 In fact, there are also voices that stood in the contrary condemning the regulation of social media. Interestingly, both sides have human rights concerns at the heart of their arguments. Examination of the overall discourse on the regulation of social media shows the existence of contentions on the necessity and possibility of the regulation of social media on one hand and in determining the identity of the regulator on the other. Under the following paragraphs, this will be highlighted in light of the human rights concerns involved.
57 See generally, Christopher, Is Social Media a Human Right. 58 Ibid 59 See, Chin, Regulating social media regulating life 60 Article 19, “Self-regulation and „hate speech‟ on social media platforms”, at
For some, social media should not be regulated by law for such measure would end up impairing freedom of expression and curtailing humans‟ and societies‟ development by significantly diminishing communication and discourse with in the society.61 Those who argue for the regulation of social media, on the other hand, base themselves on the allegation that social media misuse, including the abuse of freedom of expression, has led many to incite violence, spread hate, and infringe individuals‟ rights by raising the case of Rohingya genocide as a typical example.62 In the opinion of those who argue for the regulation of social media, such negative consequences which are increasing in an unalarmed speed can be handled only by laying down a legal framework that would govern the operation and use of social media. They also challenge their opponents by contending that “social media is a form of media outlet and just like any other media avenue, it should be regulated by the law.”63
Controversies surround not only the necessity but also the possibility of regulating social media. Despite the existence of efforts to regulate social media by governments and social media companies themselves, the successfulness of such efforts remained in question owing to the very nature of social media. Due to its converging, participatory, open and trans-border nature, social media have posed challenges to the old media policy and new efforts of regulation, wrote Yik Chan Chin.64 This problematized the regulation of social media activities both by governments and social media companies. The fact that social media tools are used throughout the world, in significantly diversified contexts, makes it difficult for the social media companies to lay down enforceable policies that would “give sense all over the world”.65 On the other hand, the regulation of social media by governments raises the issue of possibility for three predominant reasons: i) these social media tools are transnational and global by their nature and it would be difficult for a given country with limited jurisdiction to successfully regulate it; ii) the regulation of social media would require an expertise about the ever-advancing operations of social media but governments often lack it; and, iii) the fact that the social media is in a constant change makes it difficult for the law to keep pace with it and
61 “Can the law effectively regulate social media and should it?”, at
The third point of controversy as far as the regulation of social media is concerned relates to the determination of the regulator. Most human rights advocates stand in favor of „self- regulation‟ by underlining the negative consequences that would follow if governments are going to regulate social media.68For them, governments would tend to impose heavy restrictions and, in effect, curtail the enjoyment of human rights, particularly freedom of expression, online by overuse of their legislative power. However, it is not only the overreach of the government but also the overreaction of the social media companies that would cause such negative impacts.69 Others advocate the regulation of social media by governments noting the inadequacy of social media companies‟ self-regulation. According to them, these digital and convergent social media platforms should be subject to “additional regulatory tools such as public supervision, legislations or even administrative measures”.70 In fact, the trend on the ground shows that “various countries have implemented or are in the process of implementing laws that regulate social media.”71 The third point of argument in the determination of the regulator of social media tries to strike a middle ground between the above two lines of arguments. It advocates co-regulation – a kind of regulation whereby governments and social media companies would work together to reach at enforceable, agreeable and productive resolutions.72 This last line of argument sounds feasible for in such kind of regulation government and social media companies would have the chance to combine their capacities and opportunities and thereby be able to pass the limitations that would result from regulation of social media in a single handed fashion.
66 Dominic McGoldrick, the Limits of Freedom of Expression on Facebook and Social Networking Sites: A UK Perspective, Oxford University Press, 2013, [Herein after, McGoldrick, the Limits of Freedom of Expression on Facebook and Social Networking Sites: A UK Perspective], P. 129 67 Association for Progressive Communication (APC), “Content Regulation in the Digital Age”, at
What should be noted in the completion of this section is that multiple controversies surround the regulation of social media. There is no consensus on the necessity and possibility of regulating social media. The determination of the regulator, if after all regulation is necessary and possible, remains another point of controversy. For some, self-regulation by the social media platforms is productive and human-rights friendly; while others are of the opinion that effective regulation can only be achieved by governmental legislative steps. As a result of this, there has emerged a concept called co-regulation which underlines the necessity of regulating social media jointly by the government and social media companies.
Conclusion
Under this chapter, we have seen the nature and features of social media in general along with the conceptual and normative basis of the freedom of using social media. It has been seen that social media platforms have become essential tools of virtual communication with immense impacts in different areas of life. They are characterized by openness, integration, interactivity, trans-nationality and dynamism. Individuals‟ and groups‟ freedom to use these social media platforms has its foundation on their entitlement to freedom of expression and self/group development. Even though there is no agreement on the existence of the so called „right to social media/communication‟, it has been seen under the foregoing discussions of this chapter that freedom of expression, as enshrined under several human rights bills, indisputably embraces one‟s entitlement to seek, receive and impart information through these platforms. What‟s more, social media platforms are triggering important legal concerns across the globe and there are growing demands to regulate them. However, it has been seen that the regulation of social media often prompt important human rights concerns especially that of freedom of expression. Despite the fact that the regulation of social media is surrounded by several controversies, governments around the world are making effort to regulate these platforms. With all these backgrounds, under the following chapter, we will intensively see the interplay between social media and human rights under the international context.
18
CHAPTER THREE
3. HUMAN RIGHTS AND SOCIAL MEDIA: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE
INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE
Introduction
Before trying to scrutinize the interplay between social media and human rights under the Ethiopian context, it would be crucial to look into the international experience. With this objective in mind, the present chapter tries to explore the theoretical and practical reality across the globe. In view of this, the first section will present the positive and negative sways of the social media on human rights. The positive aspect of the case will be highlighted in light of the social media‟s role in exercising and promoting human rights. The negative aspect, on the other hand, will be seen mindful of the relevant stakeholders involved – social media companies, states and individual users. This will be followed by the next section of the chapter which tries to present brief accounts of international experiences that could demonstrate the positive and negative interrelation of social media and human rights.
3.1. The Growing Impacts of Social Media on Human Rights
Social media is exerting a huge impact on human rights as it does in any other part of human life.73 These impacts have double faces. On one hand social media makes positive contribution to the field of human rights protection and realization by serving as a platform where human rights could be exercised and promoted. 74 On the other hand, it serves as a safe haven for miscreants to abuse and violate human rights directly or indirectly. 75 According to commentators, social media has features which let it be an easy and effective tool to contribute for the realization of human rights on one hand and for the violation of the same on the other. 76 This being the case, it has introduced new ways through which several stakeholders on the platforms, most importantly individuals, governments and businesses
73 , Shishir and Gitanjali, Social Media and Freedom of Speech and Expression: Challenges before the Indian Law, See the abstract 74 “Why the business model of social media giants like Facebook is incompatible with human rights?”, at
3.1.1. The Positive Impacts of Social Media on Human Rights It has been stressed on the Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet that the latter has a transformative nature in terms of letting individuals to exercise their human rights.78Having noted such significant importance of the internet, the same Declaration advocated the principle of „internet-literacy‟ which is believed to “promote the ability of everyone to engage in autonomous, self-driven and responsible use of the Internet”.79 Social media, as an-internet based technological tool with an interactive, open and trans-national character, contributes to the endeavor to protect human rights. Such contributions of the social media to the field of human rights and human rights protection are twofold: 1) it lets 80 one to exercise human rights online; and 2) it helps to promote human rights with a wider chance of audibility. 81
3.1.1.1. Exercising Human Rights through Social Media The internet in general and social media in particular enables individuals to exercise some of their fundamental rights online. Civil and Political Rights such as freedom of opinion and expression, right to information, political participation, equality, self-determination,82 freedom of association and assembly and the like are now being exercised online on massive scale.83 On the other hand, social media is yet contributing a lot in the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. In this regard, individuals and groups are now able to exercise right to education, right to one‟s cultural life, right to work, right to property etc… by the use of social media tools.84 The development of online business, for example, made social media enable individuals to attain several of their pursuits which may be seen in connection with different economic, social and cultural rights.
77 Ibid 78 UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and ACHPR Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet, June 1 2011, See the Preamble, [Herein after, Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet (2011)] 79 Id, Para 1“e” 80 Souter, Human Rights and the Internet, P. 8 81 RFK Training Institute, “Human Rights and social Media”, at
Compared to other specific rights, freedom of expression is believed to have benefited a lot from the social media.85 However, the fact that social media enables users to effectively utilize their freedom of expression should not create the impression that social media has little or no importance in the enjoyment of other rights. In fact, when we look the other way round, if social media allows one to exercise freedom of expression, it is very likely that it also allows him/her to enjoy other rights too. That‟s because freedom of expression is not only a right in itself but also a right enabler the realization of which makes the enjoyment of several rights possible. 86 HRC noted in its general comment no. 34 that “freedom of … expression form[s] a basis for the full enjoyment of a wide range of other human rights” by showing the integrality of the right in the enjoyment of right to freedom of assembly and association and political participation as a perfect instance.87 This makes the case that the social media‟s importance in advancing free expression has made it substantially contribute to the enjoyment of other rights too.
At this juncture, it has to be mentioned that the very nature of social media backs and makes easy the enjoyment of human rights online. As it is discussed under the previous chapter, social media tools have some features in common including openness, integration, interactivity, trans-nationality, and dynamism, to name few.88 This feature of the social media contributed to the enjoyment of human rights online in two ways. The first is attributable to its ability to create “greater range of opportunities … for citizens to gain and share content, publish views and coordinate activities;” while the second contribution relates to the chances that social media platforms afford individuals to sidestep restrictive state laws and societal norms.89
3.1.1.2. Promotion of human rights through social media The promotion of human rights is a wider concept and lies at the heart of international law. It makes up one of the purposes and responsibilities of the UN.90 As it is clearly provided
85 Souter, Human Rights and the Internet, P. 8 86 HRC, „General comment No. 34 on Article 19 (Freedom of Opinion and Expression)‟, 2011, UN Doc CCPR/C/GC/34; para.4 87 Ibid 88 Hua Hu and Ding Lin, “Feature Analysis of the Social Media, International Workshop on Computer Science in Sports”, at
The promotion of human rights is manifested in many ways, including in terms of supervising human rights conditions; making efforts to eliminate or reduce human rights infringement and abuses; researching into human rights issues and raising awareness; facilitating redress for the victims of human rights abuse; advocating and contributing to the betterment of the human rights protection system; advancing cooperation among state and non-state actors; etc.94Those being some among what constitute the task of „promotion of human rights‟, there is a firm cognizance on the power of the internet to promote human rights.95 Social media, as a most interactive and communicative segment of the internet world, fosters the promotion of human rights in many respects. Discussion of the contribution of the social media in terms of promoting human rights will follow under the subsequent three broadly framed sub-sections.
A. Exposing Human Rights Violations and abuses through social media State and non-state actors may violate human rights. When it comes to states, they may also fail to comply with their duty to protect human rights. In these instances, social media serves as a means to expose human rights violations and insist governments to properly carry out their obligations under human rights laws.
As Mustapha Zanzoun rightly put it, social media sites are being used to denounce human rights abuse and criticize authorities especially in countries where public assembly and
B. The social media’s role in facilitating access to justice and redress for victims of violations Under international human rights law, victims of human rights violations are entitled to take their cases to competent tribunals and get effective remedy.102 However, it is apparent in many cases that human rights violations remain unattended and victims of such violations uncompensated. In this regard, social media plays a pivotal role in terms of bringing violations to light and making them subjects of campaign. This helps stakeholders to be aware of the fact and take measure while, on the other hand, letting victims to have a better chance of getting access to justice. In many instances, stories of human rights violations that trended on the social media were able to get the attention of governments‟ justice system.
96 Mustapha Zanzoun, “the Use of Social Media in Promoting Human Rights Among Speakers of English in Morocco: The Case of Facebook”, International Journal of Education and Research, 2017, Vol. 5, No. 9, P. 174 [Herein after, Zanzoun, the Use of Social Media in Promoting Human Rights Among Speakers of English in Morocco] 97 OHCHR, “Using Social Media to Promote Human Rights”, at
Another important point worth noting here is that, in many countries, there is a move to embrace the social media in the human rights protection system.103 Accordingly, it is not uncommon, for example, to see human rights commissions of different countries like India receiving human rights violation complaints and doing a lot more through social media.104
C. Opening conversation, researching and advocating issues of human rights through Social media According to researches, social media has now managed to become a “key forum for debate, organization, motivation, response and counter-response on human right issues.”105 It appears that the global, open and interactive nature of the social media has made the task of promoting human rights relatively easy. In that, it has now become possible to undertake fast and unprecedented developments towards human rights goals. 106
To recapitulate RFK Training Institute‟s report on the subject, human rights activists, defenders, and ordinary citizens of the world are now able to promote human rights by utilizing the social media‟ endless potential to pursue human rights goals.107 Accordingly, the international experiences on the subject show the possibility of using social media platforms to educate the public about human rights issues, to undertake inclusive and participatory mobilizations on human rights agendas, to empower individuals, communities, and organizations, to expand audiences of a given human rights project, to raise funds and actualize collaborative movements, among others.108
3.1.1. The Negative Impacts of Social Media on Human Rights In as much as social media tools contribute to the realization of human rights, they also pose significant challenges on the same. The internet world in general is known for enabling individuals to „bypass national laws, social norms and [human] rights frameworks‟ owing to its global character. 109 The same holds even truer in the context of social media. In fact, there
103 Mishra, Social Media and Protection of Human Rights, P. 33 104 Ibid 105 Id, P. 31 106 See, RFK, Human Rights and Social Media 107 Ibid 108 See generally, Cambodian Center for Human Rights, “Best Practices for using Social Media for Human Rights”, at
3.1.1.1. Social Media Companies
Social media companies‟ policies have the potential to affect human rights negatively. As a perfect example to this, concerns of right to privacy have been raised in many instances owing to these sites‟ ways of collecting, using and retaining users‟ information.112 Recalling that social media platforms dominated communications throughout the world, it may be no wonder that they also affect freedom of expression.113For example, Facebook‟s real name policy was being criticized for spoiling freedom of expression as it prohibited anonymous expression at policy level.114In fact, Facebook made changes to such policy following complaints and it has offered exceptional circumstances under which users may not be required to use their real names.115 Be that as it may, these two examples show the possibility of abusing human rights by social media companies as a result of their policies.
There is a tendency to look beyond social media platforms‟ policies in investigating their impact on human rights; in fact, associating the problem with the companies‟ business model is not uncommon. 116 Contending the incompatibility of these firms‟ business model with human rights, Sarah Joseph argued that such have unprecedented impacts on human rights.117
110 Nicolas David et al, “the positive and negative human rights impacts of non-state actors”, 2014, Work Package No. 7, Deliverable No. 1, P. 18 111 Jones, Social Media and Human Rights – Reflection, P. 4 112 Zanzoun, the Use of Social Media in Promoting Human Rights Among Speakers of English in Morocco, P. 173-174 113 Brett Solomon, “What can social media platforms do for human rights?”, at
There are instances in which social media platforms abuse their access to users‟ contents.118 In that, they censor such contents contrary to the principle of web-neutrality in order to pursue their goals.119 There are also accusations that these channels neglect security of personal data in the effort to maximize their profits by way of increasing ads.120 This seems why many commentators associate the negative impacts of social media on human rights with the companies‟ policy, business model and operation.
Even though social media is abusing and causing others to abuse human rights, holding it responsible under different regulatory frameworks is seriously difficult. And, the underlying cause for the difficulty has been found to be a human right concern itself – the protection of freedom of expression.121 Unfortunately, the mere conduit principle, a principle enshrined under the Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet to protect intermediaries, is also there to shield social media platforms.122 The principle provides that:
[No intermediary] should be liable for content generated by others, which is disseminated using those services, as long as they do not specifically intervene in that content or refuse to obey a court order to remove that content, where they have the capacity to do so.123
The principle offers a broad protection to service providers. And, its extension is apparently available under several case laws across the world.124
However, the international human rights law doesn‟t have the purpose of freeing social media platforms from all sorts of liability and/or accountability under the guise of promoting freedom of expression. In fact, they are required to abstain themselves from engaging in human rights violations and to monitor and take necessary measures, including take down, on engagements that go beyond the protected limits of freedom of expression.125 Also note that the idea of self-regulation enshrined under the Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression
118 Zanzoun, the Use of Social Media in Promoting Human Rights Among Speakers of English in Morocco, P. 173-174 119 Ibid, (The principle of web-neutrality advocates that web contents should not be subjected to governments‟ and companies‟ censorship as that would impair rights such as free speech, freedom of association and right to privacy, to name few.) 120 Rachel Withers, “Facebook's security is so bad it's surprising Zuckerberg hasn't deleted his account”, at
3.1.1.2. Governments Given that social media has come to place a tremendous amount of influence on the present day politics, it is no surprise that governments seriously want to watch out and control online activities.127 In many instances, states, especially the repressive ones, impede online activities by undertaking measures of interrupting and shutting down internet accesses; blocking and filtering websites; putting pressures on content creators and service providers, among others.128 On the other hand, governments also make use of the social media platforms to carry out internet surveillance, censorship and repression. 129
In an article titled “What can social media platforms do for human rights?” Brett Solomon offered an analysis regarding how these platforms contribute to human rights and how governments may use them to pursue anti-human rights ends. 130 Reminding that social media platforms have become the modern day public squares where people connect with each other, he wrote that government authorities, especially in repressive regimes, often employ these platforms to quell dissents by tracing social networks.131 The fact that social media activities often lack institutional backing has made it easy for governments to undertake online hacking and spying.132 It is also evident that some states tend to use passwords revealed under torture to hunt human rights activists and defenders and be able to subdue
126 The United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Representative on Freedom of the Media, the Organization of American States (OAS) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and the African Commission on Human and Peoples‟ Rights (ACHPR) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, “Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and “Fake News”, Disinformation and Propaganda”, 3 March 2017 [Herein after, Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and “Fake News”, Disinformation and Propaganda (2017)], Principle 1d 127 Thomas Hammarberg, et al, Human Rights and Changing Media Landscape, Commissioner for Human Rights, Council of Europe, 2011, [Herein after, Hammarberg, et al, Human Rights and Changing Media Landscape] P. 176 128 Id, P. 177 129 See, RFK, Human Rights and Social Media 130 Brett Solomon, “What can social media platforms do for human rights?”, at
There are also cases where governments collaborate with social media companies in achieving ends that have human rights unfriendly consequences. This stems from the fact that governments want to actualize their interests by the use of social media and the social media firms want to expand their profitability by using any means available which in this case includes adhering to governments‟ policies.134 Facebook‟s tendency to adhere to china‟s censorship policy in order to enter the latter‟s market135 can perfectly exemplify the case. All in all, the discussions made so far make the case that governments around the world, especially those with undemocratic political order, use social media outlets to undertake projects that would result in violation or abuse of human rights.
3.1.1.3. Users As it has been stated elsewhere, social media tools have integrated, open and interactive interface that puts on show user generated contents. These contents are created by end users from all around the world and are not produced under professional capacity nor are subjected to any editorial assessment unlike what is in the mainstream media.136 It is also to be recalled that discussion has been made as to the global nature of social media tools and the fact that they enable breaking regulatory frameworks.137
The aforesaid features of social media outlets allow users to make unlimited communication while at the same time enabling them to bypass local laws, societal norms and human rights law frame works.138 This left them with wider chance of causing violation or abuse of human rights. According to literatures, there are some who have come to label these platforms „right- infringing‟ as the result of the direct and indirect violations they are causing mostly because
133 Brett Solomon, “What can social media platforms do for human rights?”, at
Direct violation of human rights comes into picture when a specific content went straight against a protected right. In many cases, user generated contents “can directly threaten privacy, security of the person, a person‟s freedom from hate speech, and other rights.”140 To exemplify the matter in the context of right to privacy, we can consider cases of communication surveillance, data theft, unlawful access, among others, which are common phenomena in the digital age.141 The said acts have immediate effect of interfering with one‟s privacy. Indeed, as it is difficult to demarcate a clear borderline between direct and indirect violation of rights, we can assume cases where a given content on the social media may result in both direct and indirect violation/abuse of rights.
Users violate/abuse human rights indirectly when they undertake online activities that will ultimately result in human rights violation/abuse. In that, there are cases where individuals‟ rights to life, security of the person, liberty, movement, to name few, will be affected because of contents that are posted and spread online. Online activities which result from the misuse of the social media such as misinformation, fake news, violence incitement, extremism, cybercrime, spreading messages of war and terrorism end up in serious human rights violations.142 A perfect instance to exemplify this is the case of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar.143 According to reports, social media tools, particularly Facebook, were the driving forces for the Rohingya genocide which resulted in the massacre and displacement of many.144 Further discussion of the case is available below under the section that tries to provide brief account of international experiences on the positive and negative impacts of the social media on human rights.
3.2. Brief Account of International Experiences Demonstrating the Two Sided Impacts of Social Media on Human Rights
As it can be understood from the discussions that have been made so far, the impacts of social media on human rights are immense and multifaceted. To slightly paraphrase Emily Price,
139 See, Christopher, Is Social Media a Human Right 140 Joseph, the Human Rights Responsibilities of Media and Social Media Businesses, P. 10 141 Lisa P. Lukose and Alankrita Mathur, “Human Right and Social Media”, 2018, ELCOP, Yearbook of Human Rights, P. 35 [Herein after, Lukose and Mathur, Human Right and Social Media] 142 Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and “Fake News”, Disinformation and Propaganda (2017), see the Preamble 143 Eli Meixler, “UN fact-finders say Facebook played a „determining‟ role in violence against Rohingya”, Time, at
3.2.1. Social Media as a Blessing to Human Rights
Under this section, social media outlets‟ positive contributions to human rights will be highlighted in light of two notable experiences – the case of Twitter Revolutions and the Berkeley Human Rights Investigation Center Lab‟s experience in digital activism.
A. The Twitter Revolutions What are often called “Twitter Revolutions”, particularly the Arab Spring, are typical examples to showcase the positive impact of social media on human rights. In the countries where the Arab Spring erupted and spread, human rights protection was poor and dependent on the leaders‟ will and whim. State‟s interest was a cliché with which rulers used to justify restriction of several basic rights.146 In a manner that contravenes the very underlying principles of human rights that “…treats people as worthy of freedoms and rights by the simple virtue of being human beings”;147 the leaders treated fundamental rights as mere grants and as “Western imports”.148 Accordingly, citizens were forced to live in conditions where human rights and democratic values were hardly existent. The mainstream media was governments‟ propaganda machine that force citizens to listen to „a single version of stories.‟149 It is in this kind of setting that the Arab Spring started to erupt by echoing concerns of democracy and freedom.
The social media was able to get applause for its significant role during the uprising. 150 Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and WordPress, among others, were used to express political grievances; expose and denounce human rights abuses; organize and mobilize protests; etc.151
145 See, Price, Twitter and Human Rights: A Complicated Story. 146 Vida Hamd, “Reflections on Human Rights Understandings in light of the Arab Spring”, 2016, the Hague Institute for Global Justice, Working Paper 16, P. 1 147 Ibid 148 Jessica Kempner, “Human Rights in the Middle East Since the Arab Spring: What‟s Changed?”, at
The platforms helped the protesters to make communications, schedule protests, co-ordinate movements and make calls of reform.152 This way, “revolutionary zeal spread like wildfire from city to city, country to country, continent to continent”153 by airing concerns of democracy and human rights. It is, thus, in recognition of the social media‟s importance during the protests that the term “twitter revolutions” was coined and pervasively used.154
Literatures note that the post-revolution state of human rights protection in the countries where the Arab Spring took place is now in vain. Even though states like Tunisia relatively fare better in enhancing protection of human rights, the case in other countries remain worrisome.155 Jessica Kempner‟s evaluation of the subject makes the case that “human rights violations in the Arab world seem more prevalent than ever”. 156 However, this will not in any way make the fight wrong or undermine the importance of social media during the protests. The protests, backed by social media platforms, were successful at least in awaking “[an] undying thirst for dignity and freedom”157 which is the very moral foundation of human rights.
B. Activism 2.0: Berkeley’s experience
It‟s has been seen in the previous sections that social media platforms have importance not only to enjoy rights online but also to undertake promotion of human rights. Activism 2.0 is a modern day activism that relies on social media and other digital tools to work on human rights agendas.158 The Human Rights Investigation Center Lab159 at the University of California's Berkeley Law department uses social media and the internet to investigate and document human rights violations across the globe.160 They fight human rights violations through social media by training college students worldwide who will be able to document
152 Ibid 153 Ibid 154 Sarah, Social Media, Political Change, and Human Rights, P. 14-146 155 “Arab Spring”, at
The information collected this way will be used by human rights activists, defenders and lawyers as an evidence to expose relevant information and/or to successfully plead before tribunals.163 Noting that it currently focuses on investigating crimes in Syria, Iraq and Myanmar, the Center reported that several students from around the world who “collectively speak more than 30 languages are … contribut[ing] verified information to international NGOs, news organizations, and legal partners.”164 The project, focusing on pressing human rights challenges all over the world, managed to undertake 39 investigations in 2018-2019 alone.165 Sam Dubberly of Amnesty International puts the actual impacts of the said project as “reverberating;”166while writers are using it as an example to elucidate social media‟s positive contributions to human rights.167 Indeed, being cognizant of the fact that there are several projects of human rights promotion that have the social media‟s backing, we can take the case of the UC Berkeley digital activism as a typical example that unveils the channel‟s immense potential in the field.
3.2.2. Social Media as a ‘Curse’ to Human Rights
Under this section, efforts will be made to demonstrate the negative impacts of social media on human rights with some three notable international experiences. Accordingly, the case of Rohingya Muslims, the very recent Christchurch Attack and the Cambridge Analytica Scandal will be presented in a row.
161 UC Berkeley, “Fighting human rights violations through social media”, at
A. The Case of Rohingya Muslims
Rohingya Muslims, stateless people living in the Buddhist-dominated Myanmar who were officially deprived of citizenship following the enactment of the state‟s Citizenship law in 1982, constitute around 1.1 Million people of the country even though figures show that hundreds of thousands of them fled the state following the 2017 military crackdown.168 According to ECHO‟s fact sheet, members of the said minority suffered from multi- dimensional discriminations which include day to day life restriction, travel ban, limitation on right to work, inability to marry without permission and so forth.169 This seems why a report published on Aljazeera depicted them as “the world‟s most persecuted minority”.170 In 2017, a military crackdown erupted against the Rohingya Muslims which, according to Amnesty International‟s report presented on AJC News, involved mass killings, torture, rape and forced transfer of the Rohingya.171 Some describe the incident as genocide;172 others put it as „a text book of ethnic cleansing‟;173 and, the government of Myanmar, in its part, tried to portray it as counter measure on terrorist groups.174 Be that as it may, it is indisputable that the measure resulted in serious human rights crisis.175 A mass exodus of the Rohingya Muslims which led to the migration of more than 723,000 refugees between August 2017 and August 2018 was reported.176
The human rights crisis in Rohingya was associated with the potential danger that social media tools are posing on human rights. That‟s because, the role of the social media was found to be significant in causing, fueling and facilitating the atrocities perpetrated against
168 Fiza Pirani, “Who are the Rohingya Muslims? 7 things to know about the „world‟s most persecuted minority‟”, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, March 13, 2018 169 ECHO Factsheet, The Rohingya crisis, August 2018, page 2 170 Shakeeb Asrar, “Rohingya crisis explained in maps”,
B. The Christ Church Attack
Social media tools, in as much as they are helpful to promote human rights, do also promote human rights abusive cultures and trends. In recent times, these platforms are being used to upload contents that show incidents of human rights violations.182 Murders, sexual assaults, terrorism acts and other chronic human rights violations are being streamed online owing to the live streaming features of many social media outlets.183 This has the effect of spreading impunity;184 as a result, violations will proliferate and “human rights [will] become a mockery”.185 Researches showed that such trends have the effect of normalizing violations and igniting others to involve in „copycat crimes‟.186
The Christchurch attack in New Zealand is a perfect instance to show the instrumentality of social media platforms in endorsing human rights abusive cultures and trends. In 15 March 2019, two consecutive attacks were made against Muslim worshipers in New Zealand by an
177 Report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar (2018), P. 14, Para 74 178 Paul Mozur, “A Genocide Incited on Facebook, With Posts From Myanmar‟s Military”, The New York Times, at
Australian white supremacist.187 In the incident that claimed the lives of fifties, social media had been used as to spread both the crime scene and the motive behind it. In that, the attack was preceded by a manifesto – a 74 pages document that was disseminated through social media containing information regarding the attacker, his attitudes and plots.188 The attack was also live streamed through Facebook.189 This triggered outrage against social media outlets,190 and led Facebook to make changes to its live streaming rules.191 The actual impact of the trend being one that requires further inquiry, the incident perfectly showcases the instrumentality of social media outlets in promoting human rights violations.
C. The Cambridge Analytica Scandal
In the digital age, right to privacy is often in threat owing to the spread of advanced ways of data breach.192 The Cambridge Analytica scandal stands one of the most cited examples of the case. Cambridge Analytica, a data mining business that worked with Donald Trump during the latest US election, allegedly used the data of 50 million Facebook profiles to forecast voter behavior and disseminate political ads.193 A Cambridge University researcher who obtained consensual access to the profiles of 320, 000 Facebook users, underhandedly used the consent to further get access to the profiles of the said users‟ friends.194 As a result, he was able to gather information from more than 50 Million Facebook profiles.195 It is from this researcher that Cambridge Analytica bought the information and developed an algorithm that enabled it to advance right wing political agendas.196 As quoted in Channel 4 News report, the company‟s former research director Christopher Wylie admitted taking part in the project and said “it allowed us to move into the hearts and minds of American voters in a way
187 Kristen Gelineau and Jon Gambrell, “New Zealand mosque shooter is a white nationalist who hates immigrants, documents and video reveal”, Chicago Tribune, at
Conclusion
Under this chapter, we‟ve explored the interplay between social media and human rights under the international context. Accordingly, we have seen that the social media makes both positive and negative contributions to the field of human rights. In that, these outlets are positively contributing to the field by serving as a platform where rights can be exercised and promoted. This has been illustrated with the practical cases of the „Twitter Revolutions‟ and the Berkeley‟s experience in digital activism. On the other hand, social media platforms also affect human rights adversely by serving as a means through which rights may be violated or abused. This has been dealt by taking into account the involvement of several stakes on the social media especially that of states, individual users and social media companies. The negative interrelation of social media and human rights has been seen in light of practical instances by glimpsing the different roles of social media during the Rohingya military crackdown, the Christchurch attack and the Cambridge Analytica Scandal. Therefore, in winding up this chapter, what should be borne in mind is that, as Emily Price rightly noted it, social media is both a „blessing‟ and a „curse‟ to the field of human rights depending mainly on how we use it. Under the coming chapter, we will try to assess the interplay between social media and human rights under the Ethiopian context by accompanying the same with practical illustrations.
197 Andy Davies, “Whistleblower reveals to Channel 4 News data grab of 50 million Facebook profiles by Cambridge Analytica – data firm linked to Trump win”, Channel 4, at
CHAPTER FOUR
4. THE CASE OF ETHIOPIA
Introduction
This chapter marks the main theme of the whole research. It presents a critical analysis of the interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia. The chapter has three sections. The first section highlights social media use in Ethiopia with the purpose glimpsing general introductory matters. This will lead us to section two of the chapter which strives to present an in-depth analysis of the interrelation of human rights and social media in Ethiopia. Under this section, analysis will be made on the role of the social media in exercising, promoting and violating/abusing human rights. This will involve analysis of the roles and behaviors of state and non-state actors on the matter. After having seen that, section three of the chapter will follow with the purpose of addressing the regulation of social media use in Ethiopia. This section will make up the end of the chapter by introducing review of the government‟s behavior towards social media and the recent developments towards regulating social media activities (especially hate speech and false information) followed by reflections on the same in light of human rights issues.
4.1.1. General Overview of Social Media Use in Ethiopia
Even though Ethiopia is among those countries that score low internet penetration scale in the world,199 there is growing access to internet and social media in recent times. According to Ethio telecom‟s recent report, there are around 39.5 Million mobile subscribers200 out of which 19.5 Million are mobile data users.201 Computer based social media use possibly increases the figure since, according to the same report; there are hundreds of thousands who use broadband and narrowband internet.202 From this, it follows that considerable numbers of people do have access to internet and social media in Ethiopia.
199 Internet World Stats, “Internet Penetration in Africa”, at
In fact, researches show that large number of users – individuals, groups, companies, governmental and non-governmental organizations, and others – are availing themselves on the social media.203 What would be important to note at this juncture is that social media is being used in Ethiopia in a context where internet means Facebook and other social networking sites.204 Despite lower internet penetration in global standards, social media is yet able to penetrate day to day lives and communications in Ethiopia so much so that it could affect social lives.205 This will have the effect of making social media‟s impact on human rights more significant.
Indeed, it would also be important to think of cases where social media‟s impact will take effect offline thereby affecting people who do not use social media sites. In a country where open conversations are typical sources of information and knowledge, online activities will have spillover effects on the ground. Yesuf Ibrahim, Chief Strategist of the National Movement of Amhara (NaMA), explained this to the researcher in light of the Party‟s experience.206 “If a given person managed to get access to an online content that we shared on Facebook, he will tell the same to his friends, families, and others … that way we can reach people who even do not use Facebook at all” said Yesuf.207 Thus, the discussion to follow in the upcoming sections will be made mindful of these realities – social media users in Ethiopia are growing in number; however, they are not the only ones whom the social media affect positively or negatively.
4.2. The Interplay between Social Media and Human Rights in Ethiopia
The impact of social media in the country‟s human rights protection endeavor can be seen in juxtaposition with the role of the human rights actors involved. The state on one hand and non-state actors such as individual users, groups, organizations, businesses etc. on the other do have their own influences in this regard. That being the case, an overall scrutiny of the interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia makes the case that social media
203 Feyisa and Dawit, Perceived Benefits and Risks of Social Media: Ethiopian Secondary School Students‟ Perspectives, P. 294 204Ethiopian Prosperous, “ማህበራዊ ድረ ገጽ እና ወጣቱ”, at
4.2.1. Exercising Human Rights through Social Media
The enjoyment of human rights online is a growing trend in the world.208 Social media outlets allowed the enjoyment of rights online in massive scale by providing users with wide range of opportunities and enabling them to bypass restrictive local laws.209 Social media platforms are playing the same role in Ethiopia. The upcoming subsections discuss how these platforms are being used to satisfy freedom of expression, access to information, political participation, right to education and self-development, right to protect and promote one‟s culture, language and history.
Freedom of expression and access to information
In Ethiopia, social media made the enjoyment of freedom of expression, a freedom that embraces the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds,210 possible. For a country like Ethiopia where the state enjoys monopoly over the traditional media, it is no wonder that social media platforms managed to function as independent and accommodative tools of expression. Wubishet Mulat, a constitutional law expert and social media figure, described the social media‟s importance to freedom expression as an indisputable one.211 In fact, the social media‟s importance to freedom of expression in Ethiopia is not a point of contention – even if there are intense debates on whether the freedom is well used or misused.
The importance of the social media in facilitating freedom of expression can be seen in terms of its ability to respond to the mainstream media‟s limitations.212 The Ethiopian mainstream
208 See generally, Souter, Human Rights and the Internet 209 Supra, Ch.3, Sec. 3.1.1.1 210 The FDRE Constitution, Article 29 (2) 211 Interview with Wubshet Mulat, Legal expert and social media figure, on human rights concerns of social media use in Ethiopia and the government‟s behavior towards it, June 5, 2019 [Herein after, Interview with Wubshet Mulat] 212 Getachew Shiferaw, “የህዝብን ብሶትና በዯል የሚያሰሙ ጠንካራ ተቋማት የለንም። ማህበራዊ ሚዲያን ውጤታማ በሆነ መንገድ ብንጠቀም (ምክረ ሀሰብ ነው)”, at < https://www.satenaw.com/amharic/archives/46878>, [Last accessed on June 2, 2019] 39 media is characterized by overregulation, censorship, partiality, lack of independence and so forth. 213 In that, people are able to express their opinions without worries of censorship, cut out and distortion unlike what is in the traditional media.214 Yeshi hasab Abera is a journalist at Amhara Mass Media Agency and a prominent social media figure.215 Noting the partial character of the Ethiopian media landscape, he argued that the social media is to a greater extent fostering free expression because of its openness.216
In fact, a tour throughout social media tools, for example on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, shows Ethiopians engaging in different forms and varying subjects of online expression. According to the researcher‟s observation, matters of politics, history, religion, philosophy, art, lifestyle, culture, fashion et cetera constitute subjects of online expression on these channels. The fact that these expressions are made through texts, pictures, audios and videos made the communication system a participatory and friendly one.217 The social media‟s impact is not, however, limited to enabling one to express his view. It is also enabling people to seek and receive information.
The social media‟s contribution to right to information is yet relatable to the limitations in the country‟s media culture. The Ethiopian mainstream media is marked by antagonism – the state owned media outlets are busy praising the government and the ruling party while the private media are keen to blaming the government and blessing the opposition.218 This interferes with the quality of information that people receive as it has the effect of making them suspicious about the accuracy of the information and the intention behind it.219 Theoretically speaking, social media have the potential to curb this problem for it is a forum where all kinds of opinions can be vent. Simple observation of the Ethiopian case also reveals
213 Paul Schemm, “In Ethiopia‟s war against social media, the truth is the main casualty”, the Washington Post, at
On the social media, individuals are not the only sources of information. More than ever now the Ethiopian government seems re-considering its reliance on the mainstream media. In the past, it was criticized for being stuck on the traditional media over which it enjoyed heavy monopoly. 222 Now, government offices from Woreda to regional and federal level are taking presence on the social media, especially on Facebook as one can realize with a simple observation. State officials, including the Prime Minister, are also availing themselves on these outlets particularly on Facebook and Twitter. In fact, the social media is believed to have assisted the coming into power of the so called „reformists‟;223 and it is no wonder that they enhance their presence on the medium.
The government offices‟ and officials‟ presence on the social media has significance beyond enhancing transparency. According to the researcher‟s observation, through social media, government offices and officials are announcing their policies, plans and actions to the public in a context where the latter can react. This can be seen in light of meeting citizens‟ right to information. Hence, the FDRE constitution guarantees citizens‟ right to seek information in general and right to access to information of public interest in particular;224 and, the social media is contributing to its realization. The following picture has the purpose of exemplifying the case.
220 Interview with Tariku Lemma, Sidama based human rights activist, on social media use in Ethiopia and its impacts on freedom of expression, political participation and cultural rights; May 2 2019 [Herein after, Interview with Tariku Lemma] 221Ibid 222 Paul Schemm, “In Ethiopia‟s war against social media, the truth is the main casualty”, the Washington Post, at
Picture: Amir Aman, MD, FDRE Health Minister, announcing the effective date of the ban on adverting alcoholic products through Broadcast services and Billboard on Twitter225
To wind up this section, social media is allowing individuals to engage in seeking, receiving and imparting information online. However, this is not without challenges. As it will be discussed in the coming sections, social media‟s potential is being misused to spread fallacious information, fake news and hate speech thereby affecting the quality of the information being sought, received and imparted.
Political Participation
The Ethiopian Constitution and international agreements which are constitutionally recognized as part and parcel of the laws of the land do guarantee political participation as a fundamental right of citizens.226 The social media have made contribution not only in terms of fostering the expression of political outlooks but also in terms of facilitating citizens‟ political participation. A research conducted by T. Muluye Ketemaw on the subject unveiled that social media has become an important channel for political communications and mobilizations.227 In the fifth general election held during May 2015, political parties, to a varying extent though, used the social media to conduct electoral campaigns and undertake
225 Amir Aman (MD) on Twitter, at
The importance of social media in enhancing political participation can also be seen beyond its instrumentality in making electoral campaigns. Yesuf Ebrahim, in an interview with the researcher, took the case of the National Movement of Amhara (NaMA) to show this.229 Yesuf230 and his party231 use the social media, mainly Facebook, to reach their targets in and outside the country.232 This, along with other factors, helped NaMA to better penetrate the country‟s politics swiftly, according to the party‟s Chief Strategist.233 In fact, the researcher‟s observation of social media activities unveils that many other political parties and politically active individuals are utilizing the channel to report their activities to their supporters; air their concerns; advocate their programs and raise the people‟s political consciousness. Below is a screenshot of Arena Tigray Party Chairman‟s Tweet.
Picture: Abraha Desta, Chairman of Arena Tigray Party, tweeting in Tigrigna about the undue acts of the Tigray National Regional State Special Force against peaceful discussants in Shire city234
Most of the interviewees raise the importance of social media in realizing political participation and political communication between citizens and the government by relating the same with the recent political change that took place in the country. For this is dealt in a separate section below, it will not be necessary to deeply get into it. But, as Wubshet Mulat and Tamiru Huliso235 rightly put it during an interview with the researcher, social media has
228 Ibid 229 Interview with Yesuf Ibrahim 230 Yesuf Ebrahim on Facebook, at
Self-development and Right to Education
Right to education is one of the fundamental human rights that have the recognition of international and national human rights instruments.236 It‟s a cherished tool of empowering one‟s personality and its essentiality in the enjoyment of several other economic, social and cultural rights is oft noted.237 Right to education and self-development are interrelated and supportive to each other even if they are separately provided under the FDRE Constitution.238 Under the UDHR and the ICCPR, the development of human personality is mentioned as one of the objectives of right to education.239
In Ethiopia, social media tools are providing users with wide range of opportunities to educate themselves, formally or informally. Academic institutions use the social media to reach potential learners, to undertake lectures and tutorial services; to announce scholarship and fellowship programs; and do a lot more. Anteneh Cherie is a reporter at Addis Zemen Gazeta, a stated owned newspaper under the Ethiopian Press Agency. He is interested in history and makes use of Facebook to exchange information and knowledge.240 He is of the opinion that the said social media platform helped him to successfully achieve his pursuits. According to him, there are a lot of people on the social media who share their knowledge for
236 FDRE Constitution, Article 41 (4); UDHR, Article 26; ICESCR, Article 13 237 Richard Pierre Claude, “The Right to Education and Human Rights Education”, International Journal On Human Rights, 2005, Year 2, No. 2, P. 37 [Herein after, Claude, The Right to Education and Human Rights Education] 238 The right to the free development of one‟s personality is guaranteed under article 24 (2) of the FDRE Constitution. The right is provided as a component of one‟s right to honor and reputation. Whereas, the right to education has been provided under article 41 (4) of the FDRE constitution that generally sets out economic, social and cultural rights. However, the fact that they are stated under separate provisions does not make them different or unsupportive to each other given the principle of interdependence and interrelatedness of human rights. See more on this at: UNFPA, “Human Rights Principles”, at
In Ethiopia, it is not uncommon to see people decrying social media on account of impairing the culture of reading. Befeqadu Hailu, blogger and human rights activist, told the researcher that he thinks the other way round.242 According to him, social media has given individuals who even do not have the culture of reading the chance to read a page or two; and that has a significant impact in a country where the number of readers is low.243 The view gives sense at least theoretically and as it is tried to be shown earlier there are practical examples that validates it. In fact, the interactive feature of social media confers an educational platform for users to learn from one another and what‟s happening in the Ethiopian context is not any different. Observation of social media interactions unveils that people who are from different backgrounds are engaging in wide area of educative interactions even if the depth, extent and meaningfulness of the same needs further study.
Social media underpinned not only informal education and self-development; its overarching arms are stretching to contribute to the formal education system. Students in Ethiopia, by the use of electronic devices around them, do access social media platforms and widen their acquaintance.244 This is, however, without denying the fact that social media platforms, at times, spoil the education system. That‟s, among others, by way of serving as a means of cheating and exam leaking.245
To sum up, social media is underpinning education and self-development in Ethiopia. Theoretically speaking, this will have meaningful impacts on other rights too. That‟s because education is essential to adequately enjoy other rights. In fact, in the modern age, education has become “the very prerequisite for the individual to function fully as a human being” as Richard Pierre Claude rightly put it.246 Given the fact that the state lacks adequate facility and
241 Interview with Hiwot Emishaw, Social Media Figure and Author, on the impacts of social media on free speech and self-development rights in Ethiopia, June 11 2019 [Herein after, Interview with Hiwot Emishaw] 242 Interview with Befeqadu Hailu, blogger and human rights activist, on the impacts of social media in the Ethiopian human rights environment, June 9, 2019 [Herein after, Interview with Befeqadu Hailu] 243 Ibid 244 Firehiwot Aweke, „ማህበራዊ ግንኙነትን ያላላው ማህበራዊ ሚዲያ‟, Addis Zemen Gazette, Year 78, No. 205, 2019 245 Nicole Orttung, “Why did Ethiopia block social media,” Christian Science Monitor, at
Developing and promoting one’s culture, language and history
As per article 39 (2) of the FDRE constitution, nation, nationalities and people in Ethiopia have the right to speak, write and develop their language; express, develop and promote their culture; and, preserve their history. Social media tools are being used to exercise these entitlements in Ethiopia. A tour throughout Facebook, for example, shows Ethiopians utilizing the platform in a manner that develops and promotes their language and culture and preserves their history. The researcher‟s observation of social media tools such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube shows several users writing and speaking in several local languages including in Amharic, Tigrigna and Oromifa, to mention the most common ones. The researcher also observed considerable amount of users creating contents that have the effect of protecting and promoting a given culture, language or history.
Most of the interviewees were of the opinion that social media tools have made tangible contribution in letting local languages and cultures to flourish. Tariku Lemma took the case of the Sidama language to illustrate such importance of the channel. He uses English, Amharic and the Sidama language in his activism. He contended that the online trend towards using the language has born actual fruits on the ground by raising the noticeable developments that he observed in the administrative zone.247 This may also be seen in light of the claim that portrays the Ethiopian traditional media as lacking inclusiveness in terms of language and area coverage.248 Social media tools have the potential to serve as a flyover against such problem. Therefore, one can use the language he chooses; and create or share contents focusing on the area, culture or societal value around him. This way, stories in any corner of the country can be shared on the platform and may even go viral depending on their content.249 That has the effect of promoting the language, culture and values of a given society.
The social media is also contributing to the preservation of history. Anteneh Cherie noted that the platform is making tremendous contribution in triggering discussions on history by
247 Interview with Tariku Lemma 248 HRW, “„Journalism Is Not a Crime‟ Violations of Media Freedoms in Ethiopia”, at
To wind up, stories that involve various local languages, cultures and values are created and spread online. According to the researcher‟s observation, especially during times of cultural and religious festivities, social media platforms turnout to be stages that display diversified cultures, languages and historical values. In that, it could be said that social media platforms are having significance in enabling people to enjoy rights enumerated under article 39 (2) of the constitution.
4.2.2. Promoting Human Rights through Social Media
The promotion of human rights in Ethiopia is full of restraints owing to the legal and practical challenges surrounding it. Seble Tewelde berhan‟s evaluation of the promotion of human rights in Ethiopia through some selected media outlets makes the case that laws such as the Charities and Societies proclamation, the Anti-terrorism Proclamation, the Freedom of the Mass-media and Access to Information Proclamation imposed undue restrictions on the field.254 Besides, the practical environment halted the involvement of the mainstream media outlets in human rights promotion. State owned media outlets are mouthpieces of the government that lack adequate independence; 255 thus, they hardly focus on human rights promotion. Private media outlets, on the other hand, are less interested in promoting human rights because the state made the field full of hardship that costs one‟s business, liberty and even life.256
250 Interview with Anteneh Cherie 251 Ibid 252 See, Guzo Adwa, at
As it has been stated elsewhere, the very nature of social media enables bypassing restrictions imposed by local laws.257 The same holds true in Ethiopia and facts on the ground show that social media circumvented the legal and practical challenges surrounding the promotion of human rights. In that, individuals inside and outside Ethiopia were able to contribute for the betterment of the human rights environment in many ways. By using social media, individuals, groups and organizations expose human rights violations, educate the public about human rights, hold important discussions and debates, comment legislations that unduly restrict human rights, conduct researches on human rights matters, organize movements and mobilize the public for collective actions, et cetera. The important contributions of social media on the field are summarized and discussed in the following three subsections.
A. Social media underpinned the fight for Political Change and Human Rights Friendly System
Many writers and political personalities blame EPRDF for establishing a de facto one party system.258 It is enunciated in many instances that the government was undemocratic and human rights abusive.259 Reports show that it was the behavior of the government to curtail free expression and maintain an undemocratic political environment.260 Foreign Policy, in an article titled „the Ugly Side of Ethiopia‟s Economic Boom‟; described the political environment of the country as where one cannot frankly speak about politics without finding a safe place to hide in.261 Many were jailed, tortured, harassed, exiled and even killed for their political outlook.262
In opposition of the government‟s misdeeds, protests erupted against the government and continued for years. Concerns of human rights and democracy were among the prominent
257 Souter, Human Rights and the Internet, P. 10 258 Kaleab Kassaye, “The Nonfederal Features of the Ethiopian Ethnic-Based Federal Experiment”, at
Jawar Mohammed, one of the prominent figures during the protest, is quoted in Aljazeera‟s report stating that the change couldn‟t be imagined without social media.265 In showing how it worked, he said “People from all corners of the world will snap a picture, record a video and send it to us through WhatsApp or through Facebook. We take that, we verify it, we edit it and we air it back to them.”266 Thanks to the very nature of social media, one can simply appreciate its importance during the protest by checking what took place there back in time, especially from 2016 to 2018. The following picture is a screenshot of Jawar Mohammed‟s post on December 2016.
263 Jacey Fortin, “The Ugly Side of Ethiopia‟s Economic Boom”, Foreign Policy, at
Picture: Jawar Mohammed posting a picture that demands the release of political prisoners amidst the protest267
Another thing that can demonstrate the essentiality of the social media during the fight for political reform and betterment of human rights protection is simply the then measures of the government. The government tried to contain the protest by deploying several measures among which were internet shutdown and social media blackout.268 Now, Ethiopia and Ethiopians are in a special point of time that, among others, features improvement of human rights conditions especially in the field of free speech. The change which is often termed as “the reform” arguably showed important signals in terms of connoting a bright future of human rights protection. This is, however, without paying deaf ear to voices that contend otherwise. There are worries on the future of rights and freedoms in Ethiopia owing to the emergence of multiple sources of violence. Be that as it may, individuals and groups in Ethiopia have made struggle for the protection of their rights in the past few years and the instrumentality of the social media was a noticeable one.
267 Jawar Mohammed on Facebook, at
B. Social Media allowed making collective actions towards human rights issues
Social media let individuals to easily associate themselves and collectively act towards human rights agendas. The very nature of social media, particularly Facebook, makes it easy to form groups and enjoy associative rights.269 The Ethiopian experience, as is evident from a careful observation of social media activities both in the past and the present, indicates that people were organizing themselves to promote human rights in general or to advocate specific kinds of rights such as gender rights, child rights, prisoners‟ rights, minority rights, etc.
In this regard, the movement of Zone 9, a group of journalists and bloggers that put noteworthy impact in the Ethiopian politics and human rights protection system, is exemplary one. According to members of the collective, they established the group because they cared for their natural rights which the government denied; and, they were referring to this by their motto – “We blog because we care”.270 By using social media, particularly Facebook271, Twitter272 and Blog,273 they were able to trigger discussion and raise awareness among people on issues of human rights; document human rights violations/abuse; and contribute to the betterment of the human rights activism in the country. In fact, freedom of expression was an important part of their struggle for “creating an independent platform that hosts multi- views”274 was the aim of their very establishment. Their effort faced an aggressive response from the government which subjected them to terrorism charges, undue imprisonment, travel bans and exile, among others.275 But, the contribution they made and the exemplary use of the social media they showed have made their impact an acknowledgeable one.
Another noteworthy impact of social media in supporting human rights promotion can be seen in light of its instrumentality in women's rights movements being undertaken online. The researcher observed individuals and groups using the social media, mainly Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to advocate women‟s rights in an organized fashion. The online experiences of
269 Christopher, Is Social Media a Human Right 270 Zone 9 on Facebook, at
Yellow Movement AAU,276 Setaweet Movement,277 Temsalet,278 and others can be taken as illustrations in this regard. Bethlehem Negash is columnist at Addis Maleda and a writer on African feminism.279 She uses the social media, mainly Facebook and Twitter, to advocate gender equality. She told the researcher that she started to take part in gender rights advocacy out of personal commitment and that the movements being undertaken on the social media are bearing actual fruits.280 Careful observation of social media activities reveals that the channel has become an essential tool in campaigning for gender equality, exposing women‟s abuse, demanding justice and redress for victims of violence, organizing fundraising for needy people and raising popular awareness on gender issues.
Picture: “Girl Effect Ethiopia”, a YouTube channel, sharing stories of women who were subjected to gender based violence and abuse281 To wind up, social media platforms allow people to easily associate themselves and act towards a certain common goal. This potential, as is seen in the foregoing discussions, have
276Yellow Movement AAU, Facebook address, at
C. Social media enabled organizing and facilitating humanitarian assistances to victims of human rights violations
In Ethiopia, multiple humanitarian crises occur due to natural and artificial factors. State and non-state actors perpetrate acts that result in mass human rights violations. Internal displacement, ethnic cleansing, violence and hostility often occur and result in loss or threat of individuals‟ basic rights. In such cases, the importance of social media is twofold, according to the researcher‟s general observation. On one hand, it helps people to campaign against the wrong so that it will draw public attention including that of the government. On the other hand, it underpins the effort to organize humanitarian assistance to the victims of the violence.
In this regard Wubishet Mulat argued that social media‟s importance goes beyond enabling campaigns for the release of victims of arbitrary arrest or the returning of displaced people; it also enables organizing a humanitarian assistance for their rehabilitation.282 He added that, by using gofundme.org, it has now become possible to carryout fundraising activities; emphasizing that countless individuals are easily doing what human rights organizations should have been doing under several ups and downs. In fact, this is a common reality on the social media and we can exemplify the case with the fundraising and aiding projects organized to help former political prisoners of Ma‟ekelawi, the state‟s notorious languishing center, victims of the Gedio humanitarian crisis, and victims of the Legetafo incident by which government forces rendered several people homeless under the guise of taking measures against illegal housing and settlement.
To better emphasize on the Gedio humanitarian crisis, a crisis that resulted in more than 800,000 internally displaced people, the social media had importance in two ways. According to commentators, the crisis was able to get public attention because of activists on the social media.283 The activists didn‟t only reveal the messes behind the incident. They, meanwhile, used it to organize and coordinate rescue campaigns. 284 This typically exemplifies what have
282 Interview with Wubishet Mulat 283 “Ethiopia issued advisory on social media hate speech, misinformation dissemination”, at
4.2.3. The Instrumentality of the social media in Abusing/Violating Human Rights
In Ethiopia, the impacts of social media on human rights also have negative faces; viz., they serve as means of abusing/violating human rights. Such negative impacts of social media on human rights take different forms. Individuals and groups use the social media to create and disseminate contents that have natures of fake news, misinformation and disinformation and hate speech. Social media is also encouraging mob culture in Ethiopia. All of these things result in serious human rights violation. In the coming three subsections, discussion will be made, in light of human rights perspective, as to how social media served as an instrument in the spread of a) fake news, misinformation and disinformation, b) hate speech and c) mob culture.
A. Fake News, Misinformation and Disinformation
To begin with, the right to seek, receive and impart information is not confined to correct statements; however, it does not also justify the spread of false information.285 In the global context, social media has made it possible to easily and quickly spread fake news, misinformation, and disinformation.286 Fake news generally refers to fabricated information spread with the intent to deceive targets so that the latter will believe falsehood or doubt verified facts.287 Disinformation and misinformation both refer to the dissemination of false information; however, the former is intentional while the latter is not.288
Like what is in the global context, nowadays, social media in Ethiopia is being swamped with fake news, misinformation and disinformation. The researcher‟s observation of the matter divulges that fake news, misinformation and disinformation are being spread by known and unknown (anonymous) users concerning issues that are as diverse as the resignation or
285 Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and “Fake News”, Disinformation and Propaganda (2017), see the Preamble 286 ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom, “Fake News or Free Speech: Is There a Right to be Misinformed?”, at < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgzj7P5bYJQ&feature=youtu.be>, [Last accessed on May 26,2019] 287 Ethical Journalism Network (EJN), “Fake News, Deep Fakes, Information Disorder, Disinformation, Misinformation, Mal-information”,
Picture: “አጋልጥ / Expose”, a Facebook page which dedicated itself to exposing fake news, briefing its missions and revealing the falseness of a letter which claimed to be from the Ministry of Revenue291 There are groups and individuals that monitor and expose false information on the social media, especially on Facebook. A tour throughout their pages unveils that hardly a day goes by without false information appearing and spreading on the social media.292 The spread of fake news, misinformation and disinformation doesn‟t only interfere with the quality of information that people receive; it has also the effect of harming individual reputations and privacy, inciting violence, discrimination or hostility.293 What is happening in Ethiopia is not
289 See for example, how the Prime Minister reacted on the matter: “Ethiopia issued advisory on social media hate speech, misinformation dissemination”, at
The involvement of renowned social media figures in the spread of false information is another exacerbating factor. Jawar Mohammed‟s post during the Irreecha tragedy, an incident that claimed the lives of many due to stampede, can be recalled here. Jawar, a key figure in the current Ethiopian politics and media, created a post on Facebook that claims the killing of innocents during the Irreecha festival by helicopter gunships.297 But, the falseness of the information was later revealed including by government bodies and international news outlets such as the Washington Post.298
As discussed earlier, the spread of false information affects the quality of information that people receive and the enjoyment of other basic rights. As it will be discussed in the coming sections, the government has prepared a draft bill that aims to curb the spread of false information.
B. Hate Speech
Even if individuals are entitled to freedom of expression, such freedom is not provided in absolute terms both in the FDRE constitution and international human rights instruments ratified by Ethiopia.299 Needless to say, the freedom does not entitle a person to spread hatred against others. In fact, by virtue of article 20 of the ICCPR, individuals have the right to be protected, by law, from war propaganda300 and advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.301 However, the unregulated or less regulated nature of social media platforms have enabled miscreants to
294 Firehiwot Aweke, „ማህበራዊ ግንኙነትን ያላላው ማህበራዊ ሚዲያ‟, Addis Zemen Gazette, Year 78, No. 205, 2019 295 Dawit Endeshaw, “Fake News Alert”, the Reporter, at < https://www.thereporterethiopia.com/article/fake- news-alert >, last accessed on June 2019 296 Yared Tsegaye, “Ethiopia Preparing New Bill to Curb Hate Speech”, Addis Standard, at
In announcing the government‟s plan to draft a bill on hate speech back in November 2018, Zinabu Tunu, the Attorney General‟s communications head, raised that the growth of „hate speech and uncensored activism‟ including by popular individuals have become concerns of the government that would give no time to regulate.303 The claim doesn‟t only come from the government. HRW‟s senior researcher in the Horn of Africa, Felix Horne, observed that hate speech is a serious and growing problem in Ethiopia.304 In fact, social media platforms are helping the proliferation of hate speech in Ethiopia – even though they are not the only ones.305 There are cases where people simply use mainstream media outlets and open discussion forums to disseminate hate speech.306
The researcher‟s observation of online activities on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube reveals the existence of tendency to engage in hate speeches that target individuals‟ or groups‟ identity, ethnic background, religious belongingness, political affiliation, race and sex. The volume and magnitude of the problem being one that requires further assessment, a simple review of interactions made under contents that have ethnic, political, religious, or gender elements would show a clear pattern of the existence of the problem.
C. Mob Movements
In as much as social media platforms allowed making collective actions and facilitating constructive dialogue, there are times where such potentials turn out to be adverse. The ability to exercise unlimited expression and association online has made some to engage in activities that would undermine the very importance of social media. The researcher‟s observation of online activities and conversation with informants unveiled that social media is encouraging en masse movements for destructive ends. Social media users spread contents that would ignite others to collectively inflict harm on targets. “If someone finds your
302 Collins English Dictionary, 13th ed., S.V. “Hate Speech” 303 Yared Tsegaye, “Ethiopia Preparing New Bill to Curb Hate Speech”, Addis Standard, at
In Ethiopia, social media is increasingly encouraging group judgment than rationality and meticulousness, argued Wubishet Mulat. As one can simply observe from social media activities in Ethiopia, mob movements are happening with online and offline impacts. Tamirat Negera308 sees the case by relating it with the social media‟s global experience in spreading flash mobs – „the gathering of people to perform some predetermined action at a particular place and time and then disperse quickly‟.309 Social media allowed these kinds of group mobilizations in Ethiopia. Mohammed Kassa, noting that he has experienced such measures for the opinions he expressed online, associated the problem with the growing trend on social media to decide and act en masse.
There are patterns showing the existence of interference with individuals‟ right to privacy, honour and reputation, liberty, freedom of expression, freedom of movement and other basic rights as a result of mob movements made online against a given target.310 What would be important to note at this juncture is that such problem do not only affect individuals‟ security, liberty or life; it has also the effect of undermining the purpose of social media altogether. And, here is why. The usefulness of the social media has been associated with freedom of expression.311 The importance of freedom of expression, in turn, is associated with its instrumentality in the search for the truth, self-development, and democratization.312 Manipulating social media‟s potential to undertake mob movements is then against the very purpose freedom of expression. As a result, it will weaken the social media‟s helpfulness in searching for the truth, pursuing self or group development and actualizing democratic culture.
Tamiru Huliso stated the existence of mob culture on the social media and showed its destructive impacts in spoiling online dialogue. 313 He noted that some individuals, because of the crowd they manage, have come to be regarded as omniscient whose ideas shouldn‟t be
307 Interview with Yeshi hasab Abera [Translated into English by the Researcher] 308 Interview with Tamirat Negera, Journalist, on the positive and negative impacts of social media in Ethiopia, June 18, 2019 309 Collins English Dictionary, 13th ed., S.V. “Flash mob” 310 See, for example, how Seyoum Teshome argued on Natnael Mekonnen on Facebook, at < https://www.facebook.com/812185372196585/videos/2204648356513953/>, [Last accessed on June 2, 2019] 311 Supra, Ch. 2, Sec. 2.2 312 See generally, Michael O‟Flaherty, “Freedom of Expression: Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Human Rights Committee‟s General Comment No 34”, Human Rights Law Review, 2012, Vol. 12, No.4, P. 627-654 313 Interview with Tamiru Huliso 58 criticized or protested. The existence of crowds who aligned themselves to a specific group, ethnic or religious, person, political ideology, history, narrative, etc. also have the effect of encouraging self-censorship thereby limiting freedom of expression and constructive dialogue. Hiwot Emishaw, emphasizing the existence of multiple factors of self-censorship in Ethiopia, argued that the proliferation of mob led violence has become a key factor by substantiating her opinion with her observation and personal experience. 314
To sum up, the social media‟s global experience in encouraging mob movements is apparent in the Ethiopian context too. This has the effect of interfering with individuals‟ basic rights. It will also affect efforts of democratization for it cripples productive dialogue.
4.3. The Regulation of Social Media in Ethiopia and Important Human Rights Concerns
As it is highlighted under chapter two of this research, there are growing demands towards the regulation of social media worldwide.315 It is also discussed that there are important human rights concerns that surround the topic. This section does have the purpose of exploring and reflecting on the Ethiopian context of the case. For this purpose, the section is organized into three subsections. The first tries to address the government‟s behavior towards social media before and after the „reform‟. The second focuses on the necessity or otherwise of regulating social media; hence, it provides brief overview of the existing debate on the topic and looks into whether the government‟s move towards preparing the draft bill is justifiable or not. The last subsection, after glimpsing the contents of the draft bill briefly, will make up the end of the discussion by providing comments on whether the said bill may be able to respond to the social media‟s adverse impacts on human rights while maintaining the positive.
4.3.1. The Ethiopian government approach towards social media: before and after the ‘reform’
The Ethiopian government has a track record for adopting a hostile approach towards social media.316 Total internet blackout, shutting down social media platforms, jailing bloggers and social media activists, using the social media as a spying tool were among points of
314 Interview with Hiwot Emishaw 315 Supra, Ch. 2, Sec. 2.3 316 Paul Schemm, “In Ethiopia‟s war against social media, the truth is the main casualty”, the Washington Post, at
Haile Mariam Dessalegn, the former Prime Minister of FDRE, publicly denounced the importance of social media on the UNGA‟s 71st session held in September 2016.321 He noted the instrumentality of the social media in spreading misinformation, extremism, bigotry and hate; and, emphasized that such were the cannel‟s negative impacts that should not be simply ignored.322 The government‟s hostile approach towards the social media was not an isolated phenomenon that came out of blue; it was just part of the seriously restricted state of free speech in the country.
The Ethiopian media landscape was full of practical and legal restraints.323 Apparently, that was why social media managed to become an essential tool of communication for activists, human rights defenders and ordinary citizens in Ethiopia from the very outset.324 It is following the growing impacts of social media in the country‟s political environment that the government came to develop stiff desire to contain social media activities. The desire was manifested in terms of legislative and practical steps. This led Paul Schemm, the Washington
317 Amnesty International, “Ethiopia Offline: Evidence of Social Media Blocking and Internet Censorship in Ethiopia”, London, UK, 2016. 318 Freedom House, “Ethiopia – Country Report”, at
Post‟s reporter to portray the Ethiopian government and the social media as enemies at war.325
In the government‟s effort to control social media, laws such as the Criminal Code, the Anti- terrorism Proclamation, the Telecom Fraud Offences Law and the Computer Crime Proclamation most of which are criticized to be human rights abusive were used.326 The government‟s stiff desire to control social media was also manifested in the 2016327 and 2018328 state of emergency proclamations which were proclaimed amidst political instability in the country.
As a result of the prolonged social media backed protest, a reform took place in the ruling party and the government as part of which Abiy Ahmed replaced the former Prime Minister Haile Mariam Dessalegn. The reform has managed to create a promising environment freedom of speech.329 CPJ, in its report, declared the beginning of an era of unprecedented freedom in the Ethiopian media, noting that it didn‟t record any journalist behind the bars for the first time in 14 years.330 The reform also left its footprints on the internet world. Below is a screenshot of the Prime Minister‟s former Chief of Staff‟s tweet about the „good tiding‟.
325Ibid 326 Freedom House, “Ethiopia – Country Report”, at
Picture: Fitsum Arega, former Chief of Staff of the Prime Minister, tweeting about the essentiality of freedom of expression and the government‟s move towards opening blocked websites (posted on Twitter On 22nd June 2018)331
Following the reform, as part of which around 264 websites were unblocked, the government has shown a better approach towards social media. However, as many would argue, it seems the government favors the social media when it acts in the government‟s favor and turn out to decry it when it appears dissident. Be that as it may, the government has introduced a draft bill that aims to curb false information and hate speech. Many went suspicious that such is a repressive move that targeted the social media and debates arouse concerning the necessity and aptness of regulating it.
4.3.2. The necessity or otherwise of regulating social media in Ethiopia
There are countervailing positions for and against the regulation of social media activities in Ethiopia. When we look into the discourse from human rights perspective, both lines of arguments have important human rights concerns at the heart of their urgings. Those who argue in favor of the regulation of social media activities often cite the negative impacts of the channels thereby showing their adverse impacts on individuals‟ rights.332 According to them, social media is causing or fueling violence, internal displacements, ethnic tension, conflicts and other horrors in the country each of which have significant adverse impact on
331 Fitsum Arega on Twitter, at
As is clearly shown in this study, the interplay of social media and human rights in Ethiopia is two faced. Social media platforms are contributing to the human rights realization process by serving as a platform where rights can be exercised and promoted. In that, clear patterns have been seen concerning the possibility of exercising freedom of expression, right to information, political participation, right to education and self-development, and rights associated with one‟s language, history and culture on the social media. It is also seen that the social media is serving as an important tool of promoting human rights by taking into account its essentiality in the fight for political change and human rights friendly system, its helpfulness in allowing collective actions towards human rights agendas; and its growing importance in supporting humanitarian activities. Its shortfalls, on the other hand, have been seen in light of its instrumentality in the proliferation of false information, hate speech, mob movements, among others. To conclude, there are patterns that signal the positive and negative impacts of social media on human rights.
To state what is obvious, the positive and negative impacts of social media on human rights mainly emanate from the kind of use we make. It has been seen in the foregoing discussions that the Ethiopian government‟s approach towards social media and the users‟ behavior (the kind of use they make) affect the kind of impact that social media poses on human rights. At this juncture, it would be important to approach the matter being mindful of the obligation of the state and non-state actors on human rights.
Pursuant to the FDRE constitution, individuals and groups, as non-state actors, do have the obligation to respect the provisions of the constitution.335 In effect, this would mean that these non-state actors are duty bound to respect fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined under
333 Ibid 334 Felix Horne, “Tackling Hate Speech in Ethiopia”, at < https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/12/03/tackling-hate- speech-ethiopia >, [Last accessed on January 15 2019]; See also Seyoum Teshome, „ማህበራዊ ሚዲያዎችን መቆጣጠር ያስፈልጋል‟ የሚለ ነፃነትን ሳያውቁ ጭቆናን የሚናፍቁ ናቸው!, at https://ethiothinkthank.com/2018/08/17/social-media-in- ethiopia-those-who-dont-know-liberty-will-beg-for-tranny/, [last accessed October 23 2018 335 The FDRE constitution, article 9 (2) 63 chapter three of the constitution.336 Accordingly, non-state actors are required to assume these obligations in their social media lives; and, using the platform to violate/abuse others‟ fundamental rights and freedoms would amount to incompliance with their duties and responsibilities. On the other hand, international human rights laws and customary international laws require Ethiopia, as a state, to primarily bear the duty of respecting, protecting and fulfilling human rights.337This, in our context, includes the state‟s duty to protect individuals/groups from human rights violations directed against them by the instrumentality of the social media. Thus, the government‟s desire to regulate social media may be justified by the need to respond to such violations of rights since the duty to protect obliges it to take both preventative and remedial measures.338 The regulation being sought then can be taken as compliance by the state to its duties and as an extension of the constitutional obligation of non-state actors towards human rights.
4.3.3. How far does the draft bill339 go to respond to the social media’s adverse impacts on human rights?
Having seen the justifiability of the state‟s move towards drafting a bill which regulates human rights abusive activities on the social media, it would be important to glimpse how far the draft goes to respond to the social media‟s adverse impacts on human rights. Accordingly, brief overview of the contents of the drafts is presented in the following paragraphs.
The draft stresses the necessity of regulating and controlling intentional dissemination of hate speeches and false information noting the adverse impacts of the same on, inter alia, human dignity.340 It aims to ensure that people do not threaten the human dignity, the safety and security of others while exercising their freedom of expression.341 Accordingly, the draft
336 In fact, there are people who claim that the FDRE Constitution doesn‟t provide for a horizontal application of human rights on the basis of article 13 (1). In fact, under the said article, what‟s explicitly recognized is the vertical application of human rights. However, as Adem Kassie rightly noted it; a holistic and purposive reading of article 9 (2) of the constitution reveals the existence of horizontal application of such rights. Hence, individuals, by virtue of the said article are under duty to respect fundamental rights and freedoms of others. See, Adem Kassie Abebe, “Human Rights under the Ethiopian Constitution: A Descriptive Overview”, Mizan Law Review, 2011, Vol. 5, No.1, P. 45 -46 337 Inter-Parliamentary Union, „Human Rights: Handbook for Parliamentarians No. 26‟, 2016, Courand et Associés, HR/PUB/16/4 (UN), P. 31 338 Id, P. 32 (See the meaning and scope of the obligation to protect) 339 FDRE Attorney General, Draft Proclamation to Control the Dissemination of Hate Speech and False Information, Revised Draft, June 2019, [Herein after, the Draft Proclamation] [As the draft is prepared and made accessible only in Amharic, all English references made in this paper are based on the researcher‟s translation.] 340 Id, See the Preamble, Para 1 & 2 341 Id, Art. 3 (1) 64 criminalizes the dissemination of hate speech342 and false information343 in the form of written, graphic, sound, or video through broadcast media, print media or social media.344
Persons who are found to be guilty of committing these crimes face punishments of different sorts (including imprisonment, fine and social work) and degrees depending on the consequences of such acts.345 However, it should be noted that not all disseminations of hate speech and false information are punishable under the draft bill. Speeches may not be punished even if they may constitute hate speech and/or false information under normal course of things, if they are made in good faith and i) as part of educational and scientific researches, ii) as part of news reports, analysis and political commentary, iii) as products of artistic, theatrical and similar artworks, and iv) as part of religious teachings.346 Besides, a speech may not constitute a dangerous hate speech and cause the culpability of a person if the latter made reasonable efforts under his conditions to verify the veracity of the information.347
What‟s more, the draft bill also imposes duties on institutions including social media service providers, the Ethiopian Broadcast Authority and the Ethiopian Human Rights Commissions. Social media providers are under duty to monitor and suspend false information and hate speech; remove contents of hate speech and false information upon receiving complaints; and adopt policies and practices that would enable them to comply with the aforesaid duties.348 On the other hand, the Ethiopian Broadcast Authority and the Ethiopian Human Rights Commissions bear the responsibility of working to raise awareness in relation to the prevention of the dissemination of false information and hate speech respectively.349 Moreover, the Ethiopian Broadcasting Authority is required to assess and report to the public the compliance by social media companies to their duties set out under the draft bill twice in a period of a year. However, there is no any explicit remedy provided against social media service providers in the event they fail to comply with their duties except a general reference to civil liabilities that may arise. Accordingly, the bill seems to have the purpose of exerting
342 Hate speech is defined under the draft as any speech that encourages hatred, discrimination or violence against any person or certain community on grounds of ethnicity, religion, sex or disability. See, the Draft Proclamation, Art. 2 (2) 343 According to article 2 (3) of the Draft Proclamation, false information takes the meaning of any false information that is disseminated by a person who knows or should have known the falsehood of the same and has a higher likelihood of inciting violence or conflict or causing assaults. 344 Id, Art. 4 & 5 345 Id, Article 7 346Id, Art. 6 (1) 347 Id, Art. 6 (2) 348 Id, Art. 8 (1) – (3) 349 Id, Art. 8 (4) & (6) 65 morale influence on the social media platforms by employing a naming and blaming approach.350
Having seen the general contents of the draft, what could be generalized is that it seems to exert much emphasis on the social media than the rest kinds of outlets. Besides, it aims to respond to some of the social media‟s adverse impacts on human rights particularly hate speech and false information. In doing so, it tried to incorporate media literacy as an additional means of responding to the problems. It also imposed duties/responsibilities on social media service providers – even though the seriousness and/or effectiveness of the same may be disputed.
At this juncture it should be noted that the regulation should not undermine the social media‟s positive contributions to human rights in the effort to respond to the adverse ones. Among others, the restrictions which it imposed on freedom of expression should not contradict the protection accorded to the right under national and international human rights bills. Hence, the compliance or otherwise of the bill with the protection of freedom of expression requires further investigation.351
In order to realize a lasting solution, however, the state‟s move towards enacting a law which aims to respond to some of the social media‟s adverse impacts on human rights has to be supported by some supplemental approaches. These include strengthening cooperation with social media service providers and working on raising users‟ internet literacy; addressing root causes of problems which the law strives to punish; and enhancing law enforcement agencies‟ capacity, independence and impartiality.
Strengthening cooperation with social media service providers and working on raising users’ internet literacy
As it has been seen in the previous discussions it is difficult to regulate social media activities from the very outset for these platforms are characterized by their converging, open, trans- border and dynamic nature. 352 That makes the regulation of social media difficult given the states‟ limited jurisdiction, the lack of expertise about these complex tools of virtual communication, and the inability of laws to keep up with the ever advancing nature of social
350 This is, in fact, was made clear by the Deputy Attorney General, Dr. Gedion Themoteous, during the third round discussion on the draft. 351 In this study, we would not get into evaluating that for two reasons: first, such is outside the scope of this study; second, the matter involves broad spectrum of legal and conceptual issues and, therefore, needs to be addressed by an in-depth and concentrated scrutiny of the subject. 352 Yik Chan Chin, „Regulating social media regulating life (and lives) A report on the workshop “Social Media, Regulation and Freedom of Expression”‟, Hong Kong Baptist University, August 2013 66 media platforms.353 Besides, even if we assume the enactment of a comprehensive and responsive law that addresses the matter, the very nature of social media enables users to bypass laws as it has been highlighted in the previous chapters. Given the Ethiopian practical context, there would be no practical ground to disregard these worries. The involvement of local and foreign agents, the existence of anonymous and pseudonymous users, and the technological backing that these platforms would confer to its users will in effect render the law handicap. To cop up with such problem, it is seen in the previous chapters that some states preferred to work with social media companies and engage in „co-regulation‟. Even if there are claims that the Ethiopian government is making communications with social media companies, the effort doesn‟t seem an intense one.354 Besides, the responsibilities of the social media companies introduced under the draft bill are lenient the observance of which solely depends on the companies‟ willingness. Thus, the aforesaid worries remain in place. In order to curb such problems, the government would have to strengthen its cooperation with social media companies. Moreover, it should also work on internet literacy to raise users‟ efficient and responsible engagement in their social media lives, since, according to writers; digital literacy rates are seriously low in the country.355
Seeking solution to the underlying causes of the problem
As it has been seen in previous discussions, the impacts of social media in Ethiopia are highly intertwined with other factors. In that, there are factors that either trigger or escalate the problems that we see on the social media. For example, extensive reliance on the social media and the spread of provocative speeches, false information and hate speech on the same have been associated with the non-inclusive nature of the mainstream media and its inability to hold meaningful dialogue on contentious issues.356 On the other hand, the existing political and ethnic tension in the country is seen as a factor that causes and escalates the impacts of false information and hate speech. Thus, it would be better to respond to the underlying causes than focusing on mere manifestations of the problem. As Yesuf Ibrahim rightly put it
353 Supra, Ch. 2, Sec. 2.3 354 Zinabu Tunu, the FDRE Attorney General‟s Communications Head told the researcher the existence of „efforts‟ to work with Facebook Africa and the main Facebook Company. This, however, doesn‟t reasonably lead one to think of the existence of intense and meaningful cooperation between the Ethiopian government and social media companies. 355 Freedom House, Ethiopia – Country Report, at
Strengthening law enforcement agencies’ capacity, independence and impartiality The law enforcement agencies‟ lack of adequate capacity and independence leads one to be skeptical of an efficient, depoliticized and non-discriminatory enforcement of the bill.358 According to researches, global experiences to combat hate speech and false information by regulation suffered from two predominant problems: first, the laws do not strike the right balance between punishing hate speech or false information and maintaining protection of free speech; and, second, the laws are abused frequently and without difficulty.359 The Ethiopian government had a hostile approach towards freedom of speech (both in the mainstream media and social media) for long; this makes the concerns worthy of consideration. 360 The law may be used to curtail free speech under the guise of combating hate speech or false information. Seyoum Teshome used a common Amharic proverb to describe his worries – “lehati‟an yemeta letsadqan yiterfal” which may be literally translated as “what‟s ordered to a sinner may also punish the innocent”.361 This is to show how a law which aims to target false information may be used to chastise a truth. Besides, given the political pressure and ethnic tension in the country, there are concrete worries that the law
357 Interview with Yesuf Ibrahim 358 The weakness of the law enforcement agencies is almost obvious in Ethiopia and this is what government authorities themselves would not deny. In an interview with the researcher, Hamelmal Abate, one of the drafters of the bill on hate speech and false information, stated the genuineness of the claim and the worries emanating therefrom. Moreover, Zinabu Tunu, the General Attorney‟s Communication Head, argued similarly in a discussion hosted by ETV Medrek. See, ETV Medrek, „Discussion on the Draft Bill on Hate Speech and False Information‟, Broadcasted on June 22, 2019. Similarly, Dr. Gedion Timotheos confirmed the weakness of the law enforcement agencies during the third round discussion on the draft bill but argued that the best way to respond to the problem would be to empower the institutions after promulgating the law. Federal Attorney General, „3rd round Discussion on the draft bill on false information and hate speech‟, June 10 2019, Addis Ababa 359 Felix Horne, “Tackling Hate Speech in Ethiopia”, at < https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/12/03/tackling-hate- speech-ethiopia >, [Last accessed on January 15 2019] 360 Ibid 361 Seyoum Teshome, „ማህበራዊ ሚዲያዎችን መቆጣጠር ያስፈልጋል‟ የሚለ ነፃነትን ሳያውቁ ጭቆናን የሚናፍቁ ናቸው!, at https://ethiothinkthank.com/2018/08/17/social-media-in-ethiopia-those-who-dont-know-liberty-will-beg-for- tranny/, [last accessed October 23 2018] 68 may be enforced in a politically partial context.362 Moreover, the weak status of the institutions would make them lack the capacity to cope up with the technological shield that these social media platforms afford to miscreants. As a result, it would be difficult to think of an efficient, non-discriminatory and depoliticized implementation of the law.
It would be of paramount importance to strengthen the law enforcement agencies‟ capacity, independence and impartiality for the draft law to have an effective application in its promulgation. Settlement of the ethnic and communal tension in the country and establishment of an inclusive and accommodative political environment will also help to curb worries of politicized and discriminatory application of the law. In winding up the discussion, it has to be stressed that it is not a success for the law to be able to respond to every adverse impacts of the social media on human rights if it, after all, threatens or impairs the channel‟s positive contributions to the field.
Conclusion
Under this chapter, the Ethiopian context of the interplay between social media and human rights has been discussed. In that, it has been seen that social media is contributing to human rights by serving as a platform where fundamental rights and freedoms can be exercised and promoted. On the other hand, its adverse impacts on human rights have been shown in light of its instrumentality in assisting the proliferation of fake news, misinformation and disinformation, hate speech and mob movements. Besides, we have seen the Ethiopian government‟s approach towards social media and its implication on human rights. In that, the government‟s approach towards social media was hostile for long even though there are promising changes following the reform. Moreover, under this chapter, we have highlighted the existing discourse on the necessity of regulating social media which arouse following the government‟s move towards drafting a bill that aims to curb hate speech and false information. Having shown the justifiability of the government‟s step in light of the duties and responsibilities of state and non-state actors and also having highlighted the contents of the draft bill in general, we have seen some supplemental ways that should be followed by the state to pursue the law‟s objectives. As this section makes up the end of chapter four and the analysis parts of the whole research, the following chapter presents the study‟s main conclusions and important recommendations thereunto.
362 This is how some of the participants argued during the 3rd round discussion concerning the draft bill on false information and hate speech. Federal Attorney General, 3rd round Discussion on the draft bill on false information and hate speech, June 10 2019, Addis Ababa 69
CHAPTER FIVE
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusion
The study of the interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia involves scrutiny of the theoretical and normative foundation of social media use as well as assessment of international experiences concerning the interplay between social media and human rights. In that, it has been seen that social media platforms are offspring of the technologically advanced world that feature characteristics of openness, integration, interactivity, trans- nationality and dynamism. The freedom of using social media has its foundation mainly on one‟s entitlement to freedom of expression and self-development. Compared to the traditional media, social media platforms are less regulated. And, important human rights concerns, especially that of freedom of expression, lies at the heart of arguments that people ponder for and against the regulation of social media.
With regard to the interplay between social media and human rights, looking into the international experience unveils that the two have both positive and negative interrelations. The very nature of social media platforms and the multiplicity of stakes and stakeholders involved do have their own impact in shaping the interrelation. Social media contributed to the betterment of human rights conditions by serving as a platform where rights can be exercised and promoted. On the other hand, it adversely affects human rights by serving as a means through which rights may be violated and abused.
The social media‟s positive contribution to human rights stems from its instrumentality in making online enjoyment of rights and its endless potential in assisting human rights promotion. The very nature of social media outlets underpinned the enjoyment of rights online by providing users with wide range of opportunities on one hand and by helping them to bypass restrictive local laws/norms on the other. The social media made the promotion of human rights relatively easy by helping human rights activists, defenders and citizen journalists to be able to expose violations/abuses, facilitate victims‟ access to justice and redress, and undertake discussions, researches, advocacies, etc. on human rights issues. When it comes to the negative impacts of social media on human rights, it has been seen that social media companies‟ policy and way of conducting business, governments‟ interests and users‟
70 manner of using the social media have their own contributions for the violation and abuse of human rights by and through these outlets.
The interplay between social media and human rights in Ethiopia signals three points of interrelation: i) social media is serving as a tool of enjoying human rights; ii) it is contributing to human rights promotion; and iii) it is also being used to violate/abuse human rights. Social media outlets are being used in Ethiopia to enjoy rights such as freedom of expression and right to information, political participation, right to education and self-development, and developing and promoting one‟s culture, history and language, among others.
The importance of the social media in facilitating freedom of expression and right to information have been seen light of its ability to respond to the limitations of the Ethiopian mainstream media which, among others, is characterized by overregulation, censorship, partiality, lack of independence and so forth. Social media has become an alternative forum where people express their opinions without worries of censorship, cut out and distortion. Owing to the proliferation of citizen journalism in Ethiopia, social media platforms allowed users not only to express their opinion and share stories but also to acquire and cross-check information from multiple sources. Besides, it has been seen that the growing presence of government offices and officials on these outlets have come to play a crucial role in terms of meeting citizens‟ right to information in general and access to information of public interest in particular.
Social media allowed Ethiopians to easily enjoy rights associated with political participation. The platforms have been utilized by political parties, political figures and ordinary citizens of the state to make different sorts of political participation. In that, these channels were instrumental in, among others, undertaking electoral campaigns in the fifth general election held back in 2015; bringing about the political reform that Ethiopia experienced in 2018; campaigning to a certain political agenda in day to day lives and raising fellow citizens‟ political consciousness.
This research also makes the case that, in Ethiopia, social media tools are providing users with wide range of opportunities to educate and develop themselves, formally or informally. This has been seen in light of the interactive and educational nature of the platforms as well as the availability of multiple sources of knowledge on the same. In that, practical illustrations have been shown on how these outlets provided Ethiopians with endless potential to enjoy rights associated with education and self-development. Moreover, it has been seen
71 that the social media‟s importance to educate and develop oneself has a positive implication on other rights too. That‟s because education is a pre-requisite to adequately enjoy other rights.
Social media tools are also being used to enjoy rights enumerated under article 39 (2) of the FDRE Constitution in connection with nation, nationalities and peoples‟ cultures, languages and histories. In that, this study has shown how these channels enabled users to write and speak in several local languages; share contents that have the effect of showing, developing and promoting their cultures; and make engagements that have the effect of preserving their history. Besides, the social media has the potential to respond to the mainstream media‟s inability to cover diverse areas of cultural and societal values across the country, as is seen in this study. What‟s more, social media platforms turnout to be stages that display diversified cultures, languages and historical values especially in times of cultural and religious festivities.
The social media‟s positive contribution to human rights in Ethiopia is also manifested in terms of its essentiality in undertaking human rights promotion. The promotion of human rights in Ethiopia underwent several legal and practical challenges; as a result, the mainstream media was unable to vigorously contribute to the field. In that, social media was/is used to circumvent these legal and practical challenges and contribute to the betterment of the human rights environment in Ethiopia. Accordingly, individuals, groups and organizations used the social media to expose human rights violations, educate the public about human rights, hold important discussions and debates, comment legislations that unduly restrict human rights, conduct researches on human rights matters, organize movements and mobilize the public for collective actions, among others. In particular, the social media‟s positive impact on the field has been seen in light of its instrumentality in underpinning the fight for political change and human rights friendly system; allowing making collective actions towards human rights issues; and assisting the organization of humanitarian activities.
The social media played an important role during the fight for political change and human rights friendly system in the country. It is to be recalled that massive protests were made against the government since 2015 and had continued for years echoing, inter alia, concerns of human rights and democracy. As it is shown in this study, the social media, especially Facebook, Twitter and YouTube were used to organize movements, expose governments‟ mischiefs, spread political messages, report political prisoners‟ conditions, and call for global
72 attention. The social media‟s contribution to the protest can be understood from simple observation of social media activities back in time, especially from 2016 – 2018. Besides, the then measures of the government which include internet shutdown and social media blackout are additional evidences that reveal the outlets‟ importance during the struggle.
In Ethiopia, social media also allowed individuals and groups to easily associate themselves and collectively act towards human rights agendas. It has been shown in this study that people were/are organizing themselves to promote human rights in general or to advocate specific kinds of rights such as gender rights, child rights, prisoners‟ rights, minority rights, etc. This has been seen in light of the online experiences of Zone 9 and women‟s rights movements being undertaken by Yellow Movement AAU, Setaweet Movement and Temsalet.
The social media also allowed and facilitated the making of humanitarian activities. It has been seen that, especially in recent times, Ethiopia is experiencing multiple crises that often result in mass human rights violations. Internal displacement, ethnic cleansing, violence and hostility often occur and result in loss or threat of individuals‟ basic rights. In such cases, the social media allowed not only campaigning against a given wrong, but also undertaking several humanitarian assistances for victims. This has been seen in light of the very recent internal displacement of the Gedio people and the social media‟s reaction.
In Ethiopia, the impacts of social media on human rights also have negative sides. In that they are serving as means of abusing/violating human rights. Such negative impacts of social media on human rights take different forms. Under this research, this has been seen in light of the social media‟s instrumentality in the spread of fake news, misinformation and disinformation, hate speech and mob culture.
In Ethiopia, social media is being swamped with fake news, misinformation and disinformation. These different forms of false information are being disseminated and spread by known and unknown (anonymous) users in diverse issues. Such has the effect of interfering with the quality of information that people receive and also harm others‟ fundamental rights and freedoms. The potential of fake news, misinformation and disinformation to cause interference with individuals‟ reputations and privacy, incite violence, discrimination or hostility has been exacerbated by the existing ethnic tension and political hassle in the country.
Hate speech has become a growing concern in Ethiopia that directly or indirectly harms fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals and groups. This study makes the case that
73 social media platforms are helping the proliferation of hate speech in Ethiopia. Accordingly, there are patterns that show the instrumentality of the social media for miscreants to engage in dissemination of hate speech on grounds of, inter alia, individuals‟ or groups‟ identity, ethnic background, religious belongingness, political affiliation, race and sex.
The social media‟s potential to afford opportunities of unlimited communication and association has helped the proliferation of mob movements in Ethiopia. In that, it, at times, encourages group judgment and en masse measures than rationality and meticulousness. This often results in spoiling constructive dialogue and causing online and offline harms against targets. In that, there are patterns showing the existence of interference with individuals‟ right to privacy, honour and reputation, liberty, freedom of expression, freedom of movement and other basic rights of individuals as a result of mob movements made by the instrumentality of the social media.
This research also assessed the regulation of social media in Ethiopia and its implication on human rights by examining important matters surrounding the subject. In that, it divulged the government‟s approach towards social media noting the existence of signs of improvements after the so called reform. While the long existed trend towards social media was hostile and thereby human rights unfriendly, there are improvements that have been seen after the reform. However, this study has also shown the existence of worries that the current moves towards regulating social media may curtail free speech and undermine the importance of the social media.
Under this research, the debate on the necessity and appropriateness of regulating social media has been explored. In that, this study makes the case that the government‟s approach towards regulating social media (in particular, the preparation of the draft bill on hate speech and false information) is justifiable on account of the state‟s duty to ensure the protection of human rights and respond to human rights violation both online and offline. This research also showed that the state‟s move towards enacting a law should be backed by some supplemental measures which include strengthening cooperation with social media service providers and working on raising users‟ internet literacy; addressing root causes of problems which the law strives to punish; and enhancing law enforcement agencies‟ capacity, independence and impartiality. This is by seeing the matter in light of the social media‟s very nature, the underlying causes of false information and hate speech in Ethiopia, and the weak status of the law enforcement agencies.
74
The above notes being the main findings of this study, important recommendations are provided below.
5.2. Recommendations
Having regard to the main findings of this study, the following recommendations are given in order to show points that should be taken into consideration in the way forward.
1) Social media users are recommended to take cognizance of the social media‟s potential in letting one to satisfy his/her right to freedom of expression, access to information, political participation, right to education and self-development, right to protect and promote one‟s culture, language and history, among others; and beware of its downsides on human rights that often come in the form of fake news, misinformation and disinformation, hate speech and mob movements..
2) Human rights organizations and human rights activists and defenders in Ethiopia, are advised to take into account the immeasurable opportunities that social media confers to the field of human rights promotion. Hence, they are advised to make these outlets integral parts of their undertakings noting their importance in allowing people to associate themselves and collectively act towards seeking better human rights conditions, making online activism and organizing humanitarian assistances, among others.
3) Government offices and officials of any level are recommended to enhance their presence on the social media and take into consideration their impacts in meeting citizens‟ right to information in general and access to information of public interest in particular and raising popular participation and political communication.
4) Noting that the non-inclusive and partial nature of the mainstream media was among the driving forces for many to be highly reliant on the social media, recommendation is forwarded to mainstream media outlets to work on strengthening their independence, impartiality and accommodativeness. That way, they can respond to the social media‟s limitation and growing adverse impacts. In this regard, the legislative and executive divisions of the government are also advised to sustain the state‟s recent records in allowing the betterment of media freedom by avoiding the legal and practical challenges surrounding the field.
75
5) Noting that the complex nature of the social media, the existence of polarized political environment in the country, and the absence of strong, independent and impartial law enforcement agencies are hindrances to fundamentally curb social media‟s negative impacts on human rights through regulation; the government is recommended to back its move towards enacting a law by some additional measures. These are: i) seeking political solutions to settle root causes of problems (particularly hate speeches and false information); ii) enhancing cooperation with social media companies; iii) strengthening the capacity, independence and impartiality of law enforcement agencies; and, iv) raising users‟ internet literacy so as to mitigate the social media‟s adverse impacts on human rights and maintain its positive contributions in the long run.
6) Reminding that the social media‟s impacts on human rights are highly associated with users‟ behavior; and, stressing also that social media uses shall be made in observance of one‟s human rights duties and responsibilities; it is advised to governmental and non-governmental human right organizations, human rights activists and defenders, and media personnel to work on enhancing media literacy and internet literacy in the country. In particular, they are recommended to work on raising the culture of responsible social media use in order to maintain the positive impacts of the social media on human rights while mitigating the negative.
76
BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. Secondary Sources (books, reports, materials, articles)
A. Books, Theses and Journal Articles
Adem Kassie Abebe, “Human Rights under the Ethiopian Constitution: A Descriptive Overview”, Mizan Law Review, 2011, Vol. 5, No.1
Ameyu Etana, Social Media and Journalism: Journalists and Media Outlets‟ Use of Social Media Networks in Ethiopia, MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University, School of Journalism and Communication, June, 2015
Amnesty International, “Ethiopia Offline: Evidence of Social Media Blocking and Internet Censorship in Ethiopia”, London, UK, 2016.
Andreas kaplan and Haenlein Michael, “Users of the world unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media”, Business Horizons, 2010, Vol. 53, No. 1
Article 19, “Freedom of Expression Handbook; International and Comparative Law, Standards and Procedures”, August, 1993
Ashenafi Gizat, Assessement Of Social Media On Marketing Strategy: Ethiopia Facebook Users Perspective, MBA Thesis, Addis Ababa University, College of Business and Economics, November 2016
Brian Christopher Jones, “Is Social Media a Human Right? Exploring the Scope of Internet Rights”, International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2014, at < http://www.iconnectblog.com/2014/11/is-social-media-a-human-right-exploring-the-scope- of-internet-rights>, [Last accessed on April 17 2019]
Carole Cadwalladr, “„I created Steve Bannon‟s psychological warfare tool‟: meet the data war whistleblower”, The Guardian, 2018, Cited in Joseph, the Human Rights Responsibilities of Media and Social Media Businesse
Collins English Dictionary, 13th ed.
Daniel Joyce, “Internet Freedom and Human Rights”, European Journal of International Law, 2015, Vol. 26, No. 2
David Souter, Human Rights and the Internet: A Review of Perceptions in Human Rights Organizations, APC Publishing, 2012
Dominic McGoldrick, the Limits of Freedom of Expression on Facebook and Social Networking Sites: A UK Perspective, Oxford University Press, 2013
ECHO Factsheet, The Rohingya crisis, August 2018
FDRE Attorney General, Legal Drafting, Studies and Dissemination Directorate, „የጥላቻ ንግግር በኢትዮጲያ‟, November 2018, Addis Ababa [Unpublished]
Feyisa Mulisa and Dawit Asrat, „Perceived Benefits and Risks of Social Media: Ethiopian Secondary School Students‟ Perspectives‟, Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science, 2018, Vol. 3, No. 4,, PP. 294–300
Gagliardone I., Pohjonen M., (2016) Engaging in Polarized Society: Social Media and Political Discourse in Ethiopia. In: Mutsvairo B. (eds) Digital Activism in the Social Media Era. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, < https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319- 40949-8_2> [Last accessed on April 18 2019]
Inter-Parliamentary Union, „Human Rights: Handbook for Parliamentarians No. 26‟, 2016, Courand et Associés, HR/PUB/16/4 (UN)
Jacob Rowbottom, “Crime and Communication: Do Legal Controls Leave Enough Space for Freedom of Expression? The Legal Challenges of Social Media”, 2017, P. 41; Cited in “Can the law effectively regulate social media and should it?” at
Jason M. Tenenbaum, “Is There a Protected Right to Access the Internet”, International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2014 at
Kaleab Kassaye, “The Nonfederal Features of the Ethiopian Ethnic-Based Federal Experiment”, at
Ketemaw, T. Muluye, “the status of political parties in using social media for campaigns during the 2015 general election of Ethiopia”, African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 2017, Vol. 11, No. 10
Kristen Gelineau and Jon Gambrell, “New Zealand mosque shooter is a white nationalist who hates immigrants, documents and video reveal”, Chicago Tribune, at
Lisa P. Lukose and Alankrita Mathur, “Human Right and Social Media”, 2018, ELCOP, Yearbook of Human Rights
Mathias Kamp (ed.), „Assessing the Impact of Social Media on Political Communication and Civic Engagement in Uganda‟, Reality Check Series, 2016, Kampala, Uganda
Michael O‟Flaherty, “Freedom of Expression: Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Human Rights Committee‟s General Comment No 34”, Human Rights Law Review, 2012, Vol. 12, No.4, P. 627-654
Mustapha Zanzoun, “the Use of Social Media in Promoting Human Rights Among Speakers of English in Morocco: The Case of Facebook”, International Journal of Education and Research, 2017, Vol. 5, No. 9
Nicolas David et al, “the positive and negative human rights impacts of non-state actors”, 2014, Work Package No. 7, Deliverable No. 1
Raghavendra Mishra, “Social Media and Protection of Human Rights”, Journal of Centre for Reforms, Development and Justice, 2015, Vol.3, No.2
Richard Moon, “the Social Character of Freedom of Expression”, Amsterdam law Forum, 2009, Vol. 2, No. 1
Richard Pierre Claude, “The Right to Education and Human Rights Education”, International Journal On Human Rights, 2005, Year 2, No. 2
Sarah Joseph, „The Human Rights Responsibilities of Media and Social Media Businesses‟, at < https://ssrn.com/abstract=3146730 >, [Last accessed on November 18, 2018]
Sarah Joseph, “Social Media, Political Change, and Human Rights”, Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 2012, Vol. 35, Issue 1
Seble Teweldebirhan, the Role of Media in the Promotion of Human Rights in Ethiopia, LLM Thesis, Addis Ababa University, March 2011
Sileshie S. Kumlachew, „Understanding Social Media and Its Potentials‟, Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2014, Vol. 4, No. 3, PP. 203-214 Stephanie Jones, „Social Media and Human Rights- Reflections on China, Iran and Turkey‟, Maastricht School of Management, 2014, Working Paper No. 2014/33
Technopedia Online Dictionary, 2019
The Charity Commission, “the Promotion of Human Rights”, 2015, at < https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data /file/358902/rr12text.pdf >, [Last accessed on April 2 2019]
Thomas Hammarberg, et al, Human Rights and Changing Media Landscape, Commissioner for Human Rights, Council of Europe, 2011,
Tiwari, Shishir and Ghosh, Gitanjali, “Social Media and Freedom of Speech and Expression: Challenges before the Indian Law”, 2014, at
UNODC, “Promotion And Protection Of Human Rights (Guidance Note For UNODC Staff)”, 2011, at
Vida Hamd, “Reflections on Human Rights Understandings in light of the Arab Spring”, 2016, the Hague Institute for Global Justice, Working Paper 16
Yik Chan Chin, „Regulating social media regulating life (and lives) A report on the workshop “Social Media, Regulation and Freedom of Expression”‟, Hong Kong Baptist University, August 2013
Yusuf Kiranda et al, „Social Media, Political Communication and Campaigning in Uganda: Opportunity or Challenge?‟ in Kamp (ed.), Assessing the Impact of Social Media on Political Communication and Civic Engagement in Uganda, Reality Check Series, Kampala, Uganda, 2016
B. Internet Sources and Social Media Contents
“Activism 2.0: Can social media be used to solve war crimes?”, at
“Arab Spring”, at
“As live streaming murder becomes the new normal online, can social media be saved?”, at
“Can the law effectively regulate social media and should it?”, at
“Ethiopia issued advisory on social media hate speech, misinformation dissemination”, at
“Facebook makes changes to 'real names' policy after complaints”, CBC News, at
“Misinformation Vs. Disinformation: What‟s the difference?”, at
“Opposition: Ethiopia, a 'de facto One-Party State‟”, VOA News, at
“Report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar”, A/HRC/39/64, 2018, at
“Responsibility of the State”, at
“Social Media Marketing in Ethiopia”, at
“Technology and Human Rights Program”, at
“Why the business model of social media giants like Facebook is incompatible with human rights?”, at
“Zone 9 Bloggers”, at
Abraha Desta on Twitter, at
Adam Lankford, “What Drives Suicidal Mass Killers”, New York Times, at
Al Jazeera English on Facebook, „Ethiopia: a social media-led revolution‟, at < https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera/videos/10155772771109016/ > [Last accessed April 12, 2019] Al Jazeera, “How social media shaped calls for political change in Ethiopia”, at
Misinformed?”, at < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgzj7P5bYJQ&feature=youtu.be>, [Last accessed on May 26,2019]
Amir Aman (MD) on Twitter, at
Andy Davies, “Whistleblower reveals to Channel 4 News data grab of 50 million Facebook profiles by Cambridge Analytica – data firm linked to Trump win”, Channel 4, at
Anshula Garg, “Social Media and its dynamics”, at < https://www.slideshare.net/anshulagarg1/social-media-and-its-dynamics>, [Last accessed on April 15 2019]
Article 19, “Self-regulation and „hate speech‟ on social media platforms”, at
Association for Progressive Communication (APC), “Content Regulation in the Digital Age”, at
Ben Riley Smith, “Trump-linked Cambridge Analytica suspended from Facebook after 'harvesting 50 million profiles'”, The Telegraph, at
Blean Tsige, “Can Social Media contribute to Human Rights?”, at
Brett Solomon, “What can social media platforms do for human rights?”, at
Cambodian Center for Human Rights, “Best Practices for using Social Media for Human Rights”, at
Clay Shirky et al, “Facebook Must Stay Out of China”, at < https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/11/28/facebook-must-stay-out-of-china/>, [Last accessed on June 17, 2019]
Cynthia M. Wong, “Social Media‟s Moral Reckoning”, at
Eli Meixler, “UN fact-finders say Facebook played a „determining‟ role in violence against Rohingya”, Time, at
Emily Price, “Twitter and Human Rights: A Complicated Story”, at < https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/blog/twitter-and-human-rights-complicated-story >, [Last accessed on June 17 2019]
Ethical Journalism Network (EJN), “Fake News, Deep Fakes, Information Disorder, Disinformation, Misinformation, Mal-information”,
Ethiopian News Agency, “Social Media Law Enforcement Crucial for Ethiopia: Opinions”, at
Ethiopian Prosperous, “ማህበራዊ ድረ ገጽ እና ወጣቱ”, at
Ethio-telecom, “Tele-density in Ethiopia as of December 31, 2018”, at
Felix Horne, “Tackling Hate Speech in Ethiopia”, at < https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/12/03/tackling-hate-speech-ethiopia >, [Last accessed on January 15 2019]
Firehiwot Aweke, „ማህበራዊ ግንኙነትን ያላላው ማህበራዊ ሚዲያ‟, Addis Zemen Gazette, Year 78, No. 205, 2019
Fitsum Arega on Twitter, at
Fiza Pirani, “Who are the Rohingya Muslims? 7 things to know about the „world‟s most persecuted minority‟”, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, March 13, 2018
Freedom House, Ethiopia – Country Report, at
Gabrielle Byrd, “Does Freedom of Speech Exist on Social Media” at
Getachew Shiferaw, “የህዝብን ብሶትና በዯል የሚያሰሙ ጠንካራ ተቋማት የለንም። ማህበራዊ ሚዲያን ውጤታማ በሆነ መንገድ ብንጠቀም (ምክረ ሀሰብ ነው)”, at < https://www.satenaw.com/amharic/archives/46878>, [Last accessed on June 2, 2019]
Girl Effect Ethiopia on YouTube, at
Guzo Adwa, at
Heather Kelly, “Facebook changes live stream rules after New Zealand shooting”, CNN, at
Hicham Alaoui, “Is the Arab world better off, five years after the Arab Spring?”, at
Hilary Grigonis, “Governments are stepping in to regulate social media, but there may be a better way”, at
HRW, „“They Know Everything We Do” Telecom and Internet Surveillance in Ethiopia‟, at
< https://www.hrw.org/report/2014/03/25/they-know-everything-we-do/telecom-and-internet-surveillance- ethiopia>, [Last accessed on March 26, 2019 ] HRW, “„Journalism Is Not a Crime‟ Violations of Media Freedoms in Ethiopia”, at
Hua Hu and Ding Lin, “Feature Analysis of the Social Media, International Workshop on Computer Science in Sports”, at
Human Rights Center of UC Berkeley, “Where Facts Matter”,
Internet World Stats, “Internet Penetration in Africa”, at
Jacey Fortin, “The Ugly Side of Ethiopia‟s Economic Boom”, Foreign Policy, at
Jane Wakefield, “Christchurch shootings: Social media races to stop attack footage”, BBC, at
Jawar Mohammed on Facebook, at
Jessica Kempner, “Human Rights in the Middle East Since the Arab Spring: What‟s Changed?”, at
Joel Simon, “Repression Goes Digital: the Internet has become a chokepoint in the struggle for a free press”, at
Josh Horwitz, “the only way Facebook enters China is as a tool of the government”, at < https://qz.com/644588/the-only-way-facebook-enters-china-is-as-a-tool-of-the-government/ >, [Last accessed on June 17, 2019]
Mitch Joel, „Privacy Is Dead. Facebook and Cambridge Analytica Have Just Confirmed It.‟, at https://www.sixpixels.com/articles/archives/privacy_is_dead_facebook_and_cambridge_anal ytica_have_just_confirmed_it/, [last accessed on June 2 2019]
Moses Karanja, “Reconnecting the internet is the first litmus test Ethiopia‟s new prime minister has to pass”, at
Muthoki Mumo, „Under Abiy, Ethiopia's media have more freedom but challenges remain‟,
Natnael Mekonnen on Facebook, at < https://www.facebook.com/812185372196585/videos/2204648356513953/>, [Last accessed on June 2, 2019]
Nicole Orttung, “Why did Ethiopia block social media,” Christian Science Monitor, at
OHCHR, “Impunity and the rule of law”, at
OHCHR, “Using Social Media to Promote Human Rights”, at
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), “Participative Web: User-Created Content”, at < https://www.oecd.org/sti/38393115.pdf>, [Last accessed on April 12 2019]
Paul Mozur, “A Genocide Incited on Facebook, With Posts From Myanmar‟s Military”, The New York Times, at
Paul Schemm, “In Ethiopia‟s war against social media, the truth is the main casualty”, the Washington Post, at
Permanent Mission of the FDRE to the UN, “Remarks by H.E, Mr. Hailemariam Dessalegn, Prime Minister of the FDRE at the 71st Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations”, at
Rachel Withers, “Facebook's security is so bad it's surprising Zuckerberg hasn't deleted his account”, at
RFK Training Institute, “Human Rights and social Media”, at
Setwaweet movement on Facebook, at
Seyoum Teshome, „ማህበራዊ ሚዲያዎችን መቆጣጠር ያስፈልጋል‟ የሚለ ነፃነትን ሳያውቁ ጭቆናን የሚናፍቁ ናቸው!, at https://ethiothinkthank.com/2018/08/17/social-media-in-ethiopia-those-who-dont- know-liberty-will-beg-for-tranny/, [last accessed October 23 2018
Shakeeb Asrar, “Rohingya crisis explained in maps”,
Sheshu Babu, “Social media and violation of human rights”, at
Steve Stecklow, “Why Facebook is losing the war on hate speech in Myanmar”, at
Temsalet on Facebook, at
The Economist, „Press freedom in Ethiopia has blossomed. Will it last?‟, at < https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2019/03/16/press-freedom-in-ethiopia-has-blossomed- will-it-last >, [Last accessed on March 24, 2019]
The Internet Society, “Policy Brief: Human Rights”, at
Tina Xu, “the Arab Spring, Social Media, and Human Rights”, at
UC Berkeley, “Berkeley students investigate war crimes using social media”,
UC Berkeley, “Fighting human rights violations through social media”, at
UC Berkeley, Human Rights Center, at < https://humanrights.berkeley.edu/>, [Last accessed on June 19, 2019]
UN News, “Ethiopian leader at UN Assembly decries use of social media to spread messages of hate and bigotry”, at
UNCHR, “the Rohingya Emergency”, at
UNFPA, “Human Rights Principles”, at
Yared Tsegaye, “Ethiopia Preparing New Bill to Curb Hate Speech”, Addis Standard, at
Yellow Movement AAU, Facebook address, at
Yeshi hasab Abera on Facebook, at < https://www.facebook.com/yeshihasab.abera >, [last accessed June 8, 2019]
Yesuf Ebrahim on Facebook, at
Zone 9 on Facebook, at < https://www.facebook.com/Zone9ers/posts/1388884851200003?__tn__=H-R >, [Last accessed on June 10, 2019]
Zone 9 on Facebook, at
Zone 9 on Facebook, at
Zone 9 on Twitter, at
Zone 9‟s Blog, at
አጋልጥ / Expose on Facebook, at
የአማራ ብሔራዊ ንቅናቄ National Movement of Amhara on Facebook, at
II. Legislations
A. Treaties, Declaration and Conventions
Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, 4 November 1950, ETS 5, at
HRC, „General comment No. 34 on Article 19 (Freedom of Opinion and Expression)‟, 2011, UN Doc CCPR/C/GC/34
HRC, „Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises‟, 2011, A/HRC/17/31
HRC, Resolution on the Internet and Human Rights, 2012, A/HRC/RES/20/8, at
Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, IACHR, “Freedom of Expression and the Internet”, December 31 2013, at
OHCHR, „Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights‟, 2011, HR/PUB/, New York, US
Organization of African Unity (OAU), African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights ("Banjul Charter"), 27 June 1981, CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982), available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3630.html [accessed 28 June 2019]
Organization of American States (OAS), American Convention on Human Rights "Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica" (B-32), 22 January 1969, at
The United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and ACHPR Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and “Fake News”, Disinformation and Propaganda, 3 March 2017
United Nations, Charter of the United Nations, 24 October 1945, 1 UNTS XVI, available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3930.html [Last accessed on 30 May 2019]
UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171, at
UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948, 217 A (III), at
UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and ACHPR Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet, June 1 2011
B. National Legislations
The Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, 1995, Federal Negarit Gazzeta, Proc. No. 1, 1st Year, No. 1
State of Emergency Proclamation for the Maintenance of Public Peace and Security, Federal negarit Gazette, Proclamation No.1/2016 State of Emergency Proclamation for the Maintenance of Public Peace and Security, Federal negarit Gazette, Proclamation No.--/2018 FDRE Attorney General, Draft Proclamation to Control the Dissemination of Hate Speech and False Information, [Revised Draft] June 2019
III. Cases
The Supreme Court of Canada, Crookes v. Newton, S.C.R. 269, October 19, 2011
European Court of Human Rights, Delfi AS v. Estonia, App. No. 64569/09, October 10 2013
European Court of Human Rights, Autronic AG v Switzerland, App. No. 12726/87, May 22 1990
European Court of Human Rights, Ahmet Yıldırım v. Turkey, App. No. 3111/10, 2012
IV. Interviews
Interview with Yesuf Ibrahim, Chief Strategist, the National Movement of Amhara, on the importance of social media in promoting human rights and realizing political participation vis-à-vis the government‟s behavior towards it, June 16, 2019
Interview with Wubshet Mulat, Legal expert and social media figure, on human rights concerns of social media use in Ethiopia and the government‟s behavior towards it, June 5, 2019
Interview with Yeshihasab Abera, journalist at Amhara Mass Media Agency and Social Media Figure, on the impact of social media on free expression, education, self-development and other rights in comparison with the mainstream media, June 07 2019
Interview with Mohammed Kassa, Historical and Societal Values Advocate and Social Media User, on the importance of social media to protect and promote culture, language and history, June, 2019
Interview with Tariku Lemma, Sidama based human rights activist, on social media use in Ethiopia and its impacts on freedom of expression, political participation and cultural rights; May 2 2019
Interview with Hamelmal Abate, Public Prosecutor, Legal Studies, Drafting and Dissemination Department, FDRE Attorney General, one of the drafters of the new bill on hate speech and false information, on the draft bill on hate speech and false information, June 10 2019
Interview with Tamiru Huliso, Social Media Figure, on the impacts of social media on human rights in Ethiopia, June 11 2019
Interview with Anteneh Cherie, reporter at Addis Zemen Gazette and Social media figure, on the impact of social media on free expression, education, self-development and other rights in comparison with the mainstream media, June 07 2019
Interview with Hiwot Emishaw, Social Media Figure and Author, on the impacts of social media on free speech and self-development rights in Ethiopia, June 11 2019
Interview with Befeqadu Hailu, blogger and human rights activist, on the impacts of social media in the Ethiopian human rights environment, June 9, 2019
Interview with Kelbesa Alemu, lawyer and social media user, on the impacts of social media on human rights, June 6 2019
Interview with Bethlehem Negash, Women‟s rights Advocate on social media, on the use of social media to promote gender right, June 12 2019
Interview with Zinabu Tunu, Communication Department Head, FDRE Attorney General, on the draft bill on hate speech and false information, June 10 2019
Interview with Tamirat Negera, Journalist, on the positive and negative impacts of social media in Ethiopia, June 18, 2019 V. Other Sources ETV Medrek, „Discussion on the Draft Bill on Hate Speech and False Information‟, Broadcasted on June 22, 2019. Federal Attorney General, „3rd round Discussion on the draft bill on false information and hate speech‟, June 10 2019, Addis Ababa