For the law to be respected, first make it respectable.“If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable,” argued Louis Brandeis, a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States between 1916 and 1939
Recently, the government of Tanzania published draft Electronic and Postal Communication (Online Content) Regulations which would struggle to command respect. Among its many shortcomings, the regulations contain such broad, ill-defined terms as ‘acceptable standards of behaviour’, ‘bad language’, and ‘causing annoyance’ that it is difficult to be certain about what online content is permitted and what content is prohibited in Tanzania. Moreover, the draft regulations propose to outlaw such a wide range of online activity that many social media users may be unwitting wrongdoers already.
Here are four stories that show how the regulations’ lack of clarity and haphazard criminalization of online content choke creativity, stifle debate, create fear and silence free speech in Tanzania.
Choking creativity. Hawra Mohamed is a young journalism student who wants to develop her writing skills and build up an online profile to showcase her abilities to potential employers. She starts a blog, posting some of her student assignments and other articles about student life. Her posts become popular, and her fellow students enjoy commenting on the articles and photos that she shares. Under the proposed regulations, she has to register her blog with the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority (TCRA). This involves paying a fee, which she can hardly afford. And she has to read every comment before it is published, which she doesn't have the time to do. So she shuts down the blog and aborts a promising journalism career.
Stifling debate. Farida Mustafah, a ward councilor, has set up a Facebook page for herself. She enjoys the support of many of the residents of her ward, so they "like" her page. She posts news of her activities on the council and around the ward, and asks her followers for their views and suggestions. Under the proposed regulations, she has to pre-approve every comment and suggestion before it appears on her Facebook page. Facebook does not allow her to do this, so she has a choice: close the page and lose the useful suggestions of her constituents, or keep the page open and risk prosecution.
Creating fear. Benedict Mosha is a junior civil servant. He comes across documents showing that a prominent businessman is exporting gemstones without paying any taxes, and that the Permanent Secretary is being paid to keep quiet. The civil servant knows that if he reports this to his boss, he will lose his job. And he's worried that if he speaks out in public, the businessman will find a way to harm him. So he joins an online forum, conceals his true identity using a pseudonym, and posts the incriminating documents. The corruption is revealed and the authorities investigate while Benedict remains safely anonymous. Under the proposed regulations, the businessman could go to court to force the online forum to reveal his name. If the forum owners refuse to cooperate, or are genuinely unable to provide his true identity, they could go to prison.
Silencing speech. Finally, Leonard Mgamba is a young man in Dar es Salaam, upset about the poor state of the roads near his house. He posts a photo on Facebook, asking why his member of parliament has allowed this to happen, and accuses him of being lazy. Under the proposed regulations, if the MP is offended by this, Leonard can be prosecuted, and fined 5 million shillings, be imprisoned for 12 months.
If we want a Tanzania in which justified complaints are not tolerated, corruption cannot be reported anonymously, politicians cannot receive honest feedback from their constituents and budding journalists cannot practice their trade, then these regulations are a good way to achieve it.
But, without the draconian measure of shutting it down completely, there is no way to silence the chorus of Tanzanian voices that the internet has set free. We can come together for a constructive conversation on improving online civility and preventing slander, fake news and the deliberate distortion of truth.
A brief opportunity for such a conversation opened when the government invited citizens to comment on the regulations. Hopefully the invitation was genuine, and that the submissions will shape a final set of online content regulations that is worthy of our respect. After all, as Brandeis also said, “in the frank expression of conflicting opinions lies the greatest promise of wisdom in governmental action.”
This article first appeared in The Citizen newspaper published in Tanzania on October 11, 2017
Recently, the government of Tanzania published draft Electronic and Postal Communication (Online Content) Regulations which would struggle to command respect. Among its many shortcomings, the regulations contain such broad, ill-defined terms as ‘acceptable standards of behaviour’, ‘bad language’, and ‘causing annoyance’ that it is difficult to be certain about what online content is permitted and what content is prohibited in Tanzania. Moreover, the draft regulations propose to outlaw such a wide range of online activity that many social media users may be unwitting wrongdoers already.
Here are four stories that show how the regulations’ lack of clarity and haphazard criminalization of online content choke creativity, stifle debate, create fear and silence free speech in Tanzania.
Choking creativity. Hawra Mohamed is a young journalism student who wants to develop her writing skills and build up an online profile to showcase her abilities to potential employers. She starts a blog, posting some of her student assignments and other articles about student life. Her posts become popular, and her fellow students enjoy commenting on the articles and photos that she shares. Under the proposed regulations, she has to register her blog with the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority (TCRA). This involves paying a fee, which she can hardly afford. And she has to read every comment before it is published, which she doesn't have the time to do. So she shuts down the blog and aborts a promising journalism career.
Stifling debate. Farida Mustafah, a ward councilor, has set up a Facebook page for herself. She enjoys the support of many of the residents of her ward, so they "like" her page. She posts news of her activities on the council and around the ward, and asks her followers for their views and suggestions. Under the proposed regulations, she has to pre-approve every comment and suggestion before it appears on her Facebook page. Facebook does not allow her to do this, so she has a choice: close the page and lose the useful suggestions of her constituents, or keep the page open and risk prosecution.
Creating fear. Benedict Mosha is a junior civil servant. He comes across documents showing that a prominent businessman is exporting gemstones without paying any taxes, and that the Permanent Secretary is being paid to keep quiet. The civil servant knows that if he reports this to his boss, he will lose his job. And he's worried that if he speaks out in public, the businessman will find a way to harm him. So he joins an online forum, conceals his true identity using a pseudonym, and posts the incriminating documents. The corruption is revealed and the authorities investigate while Benedict remains safely anonymous. Under the proposed regulations, the businessman could go to court to force the online forum to reveal his name. If the forum owners refuse to cooperate, or are genuinely unable to provide his true identity, they could go to prison.
Silencing speech. Finally, Leonard Mgamba is a young man in Dar es Salaam, upset about the poor state of the roads near his house. He posts a photo on Facebook, asking why his member of parliament has allowed this to happen, and accuses him of being lazy. Under the proposed regulations, if the MP is offended by this, Leonard can be prosecuted, and fined 5 million shillings, be imprisoned for 12 months.
If we want a Tanzania in which justified complaints are not tolerated, corruption cannot be reported anonymously, politicians cannot receive honest feedback from their constituents and budding journalists cannot practice their trade, then these regulations are a good way to achieve it.
But, without the draconian measure of shutting it down completely, there is no way to silence the chorus of Tanzanian voices that the internet has set free. We can come together for a constructive conversation on improving online civility and preventing slander, fake news and the deliberate distortion of truth.
A brief opportunity for such a conversation opened when the government invited citizens to comment on the regulations. Hopefully the invitation was genuine, and that the submissions will shape a final set of online content regulations that is worthy of our respect. After all, as Brandeis also said, “in the frank expression of conflicting opinions lies the greatest promise of wisdom in governmental action.”
This article first appeared in The Citizen newspaper published in Tanzania on October 11, 2017
