A Case Study Based Advocacy Paper February 2018

Zimbabwe Democracy Institute

INTERNET USE FOR PROMOTING HUMAN RIGHTS

AND DEMOCRACY IN ZIMBABWE: Possibilities,

Challenges and Policy Advocacy Directions

ii | P a g e

Copyright Statement

© ZDI & MC, 2018.

Copyright in this article is vested with ZDI & MC. No part of this report may be reproduced in whole or in

part without the express permission, in writing, of the owner. It should be noted that the content and/or

any opinions expressed in this publication are those of the ZDI & MC, and not necessarily of Counterpart

International or USAID.

Zimbabwe Democracy Institute

66 Jason Moyo Avenue,

2nd

Floor

Bothwell House

Harare

Zimbabwe

www.zdi.org.zw

zditrustinfo@gmail.com

Acknowledgements

ZDI & MC acknowledge the support given by the United States Agency for International Development

(USAID) and Counterpart International in making this study possible through. This contribution is highly

appreciated and thanked.

Our gratitude is also extended to all key-informants of this study. Although they cannot be acknowledged

one by one here, it is our hope that mentioning them here will go a long way in showing our thankfulness

to them for sacrificing their careers, time and energy talking to us.

We also thank the efforts of the ZDI & MC board members and research team for working tirelessly to

make the production of this report a possibility.

Media Centre

66 Jason Moyo Avenue,

2nd

Floor

Bothwell House

Harare

Zimbabwe

iii | P a g e

Contents

Copyright Statement ................................................................................................................................ ii

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................. ii

MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS................................................................................................................................. 1

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 3

Political Context ...................................................................................................................................... 3

Research Objectives ............................................................................................................................... 4

2. RESEARCH STRATEGY ........................................................................................................................ 5

3. RESEARCH FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................... 6

1. Extent of Online Presence among Democracy & Human Rights Entities in Zimbabwe....................... 6

2. Extent of Online Human Rights &Democracy Promotion in Zimbabwe ............................................... 7

3. Extent of Civic Education Online ......................................................................................................... 9

4. „Online Impact Capacity‟ of Entities Promoting Human Rights & Democracy in Zimbabwe ................ 9

4. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................. 10

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 10

Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ 10

Government ...................................................................................................................................... 10

Civic Society...................................................................................................................................... 11

Political Parties.................................................................................................................................. 11

BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................................... 12

1 | P a g e

MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS

This study, having been done in partial contribution to ZDI and Media Centre investigation into the state of internet governance in Zimbabwe and its implications on the promotion of democracy and human rights, it examines: (i) background political challenges to internet use for promoting human rights and democracy; (ii) the extent of internet use for promoting democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe by key democracy promotion institutions and actors and; (iii) a strategy for internet use in monitoring and promoting human rights, citizen agency and accountability given the prevailing politico-economic context in Zimbabwe. It is our belief that „internet-culture‟

1 among societies and

government institutions govern internet use and its effectiveness in promoting human rights and democracy in Zimbabwe. The intention was to identify the „internet-culture‟ in Zimbabwe, strengths and weaknesses that can be considered in planning an internet-centered activism ahead of 2018 elections and thereafter. In brief, the main findings of the study are that:

Legislation and regulations governing internet freedom remain very stringent and inhibitive for democracy and human rights promoting institutions to have greater impact in Zimbabwe and there is a likelihood of further clampdown in the near future. It inhibits participatory internet-culture. Access to information, free expression and protest online remain stifled by legislation that ultra-vires the constitution of the land. Government has not done anything to repeal or amend such legislation to ensure they do not stifle freedoms provided for in the constitution. It also reveals that, economic decline has intensified inaccessibility of internet to the larger cross-section of the population particularly in rural areas and this has further lessened the influence and impact of democracy and human rights promoting institutions who would have utilized the internet in civic education, mobilization and monitoring.

Despite above prohibitive political context, the study revealed that there is a parochial internet-culture typified by a serious „online‟ absence

1 By „internet culture‟ this study refers to popular practices,

beliefs and consumption of internet among selected key internet freedom stakeholders that shape the extent of internet use in promoting enjoyment of human rights and democracy online and offline. It is conceptualized by extension and revision of Almond and Verba (1963) study, there are three basic types of political culture which ranges from parochial (black-out and no-connection), subject (connected but passive) and participant (connected and actively involved) internet-culture.

among key government institutions such as the ZHRC and the ZACC among others which are expected to lead by example in utilizing the internet to promote human rights and democracy.

There is however a fair participatory internet culture typified by fair „online presence‟ of CSOs and political parties which has albeit not led to fair human rights, accountability and rule of law activity online. Generally, there is insufficient civic education online and limited „impact capacity‟ among institutions expected to be at the forefront of internet use for promoting human rights and democracy in Zimbabwe.

Discussion on the causes of this „below expectation‟ online performance by human rights and democracy promoting entities revealed that: (i) there is no sufficient (if any) institutional funding earmarked for promoting online activism, monitoring and reporting among these institutions, thus no human resources are recruited for the sole purpose of covering human rights activism, accountability and rule of law monitoring online; (ii) there is serious self-censorship online caused by repressive state legislation, police harassments and institutional treats resulting in de-escalating civic activity online and; (iii) shortage of human resource skills, equipment and will to promote civic activism, human rights, accountability and rule of law monitoring online for these institutions.

There is need for an increase in the state of „online presence‟ of the ZHRC and ZACC because this will: (i) increase public awareness of institutional remedies in cases of human rights violations and corruption particularly in remote areas of Zimbabwe where human rights and abuse of public office concerns of victims hardly make it to mainstream media; (ii) improve accessibility, effectiveness and access to information about human rights violations and corruption as victims from remote areas across the country can be able to personally interact with commissioners online; (iii) improve citizens‟ participation in monitoring human rights and corruption and engaging government agencies and duty-bearers directly on issues affecting their constitutional rights and; (iv) enhance the effectiveness of ZHRC‟s and ZACC as their communication, civic education material and condemnation statements will be assured of reaching a wider cross-section of the population.

Accessibility and utility challenges faced by CSOs and other key actors online have given political parties and actors especially the ruling

2 | P a g e

ZANU-PF a leeway to compromise human rights, accountability and rule of law demands in the following ways: (i) it gives them more capacity to mobilize and perpetrate human rights violations without being met with counter efforts from CSOs; (ii) it empowers them to sabotage civic activism aimed at promoting human rights online through giving counter activism that discourages and tweaks citizens‟ attention to pertinent human rights and accountability issues and; (iii) it emboldens their efforts in spreading propaganda and misinformation in defense of corrupt public officials.

The study also revealed that there is however following enabling circumstances that ought to motivate CSOs and relevant institutions to demand internet freedom and do more civic education work online since these circumstances give them assured impact. These are: (i) above 70% of the population are youth in need of civic education; (ii) about 5.2 million people in Zimbabwe are on Whatsapp; (iii) above 50% social media users are youths; (iv) above 50% of rural-to-urban migration is comprised by youths, thus they have access to internet; (v) above 50% eligible voters are youth, they can change electoral outcomes if influenced and educated to support democracy; (vi) youth are the most used social strata in perpetrating human rights violations and; (vii) internet access through mobile telephony has spread throughout the country, rural citizens who comprise above 70% of the population and have been left behind during previous civic education activities are now reachable for civic education through WhatsApp groups and networks.

3 | P a g e

1. INTRODUCTION

Following a military assisted overthrow of former President Robert Mugabe‟s government, democracy and human rights promoting institutions have been optimistic about a better future for human rights and democracy realized through the incumbent regime‟s reforms. However, this optimism has started warning as nothing significant on the internet freedom front has been done by the regime since its ascent to power in November 2017. Rather, it has intensified militarization of key state institutions, ignored calls for reform or repealing of media laws that stifle internet freedoms and shown no intention to do so before 2018 elections. This entails that those elections and lives of Zimbabweans thereafter are prone to face heinous human rights violations and accountability challenges that go unreported. Thus, it is germane to device alternative strategies to enhance citizen participation in monitoring and reporting on human rights and democracy issues despite the regime‟s unwillingness to free the internet space. But, before doing this, it is pertinent to first assess the internet-culture and the extent of internet use for democracy and human rights promotion by key state and non-state actors responsible for promoting democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe and devise a strategy for enhancing their efforts deriving from gaps and strengths identified by research.

Political Context

Internet access and use provide the basis for active participation in human rights governance and democratization process in any given country. The internet, therefore, adds value to freedom of opinion and expression as it amplifies the voice and multiplies the information within reach of everyone who possesses unlimited access to it. In Zimbabwe, like elsewhere, the use of and access to internet is a leading prerequisite for the enjoyment of freedom of expression and access to information central to the promotion of human rights and democracy (Gadzikwa, 2015).

2 In fact, freedom of expression

and access to information is necessary if citizens‟ sense of belonging is to be felt. Access to internet and its usage in Zimbabwe provides an alternative space and set of communication tools which give

2 See Gadzikwa, J. (2015). Interactivity and Cyber democracy:

The case of Zimbabwe‟s Online Newspapers. Available at http://www.academicjournals.org/journal/JMCS/article-full-text-pdf/933970B51554.

the opportunity to citizens to exercise their citizen rights as enshrined in the supreme law of the land.

In 2012, the African Union to which Zimbabwe is a member state adopted an Open Access approach which allows for all African member states to have equal access to ICT platforms (Murambadoro, 2015).

3 Since the launch of an Open Access

approach, allowing all African countries to have access to ICT platforms across all African countries including Zimbabwe, there has been harmonization of ICT policies within Sub-Saharan Africa. However, access to internet and its usage for human rights and democracy promotion activities in Zimbabwe is constantly under threat as evidenced by the recent introduction of cyber security element under the Ministry of Information Communication Technology and Cyber Security whose intention is suspected to be to curtail freedom online and to push for the enactment and implementation of the draconian Computer Crimes and Cyber Crimes Bill.

Following these developments, on the 14th of

December 2017, the Zimbabwe Internet Governance Forum (ZIGF) hosted a meeting aimed at addressing questions relating to social media, cyber security, the data economy and sustainable development, human rights on the internet as well as the influence digitalization of our economy, the media landscape and the political system. The significance of internet in various aspects of life including human rights and democracy promotion were emphasized.

4

In Zimbabwe, access to internet is relatively high particularly the use of social media. According to POTRAZ, Abridged Postal & Telecommunications Sector Performance First Quarter Report of 2017, mobile internet data usage increased by 4.7% to record 2,688,410GB from 2,567,401GB recorded in the last quarter report of 2016. During the period, social movements particularly #ThisFlag and #Tajamuka and citizens were engaging on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Whatsapp to organize various protests for instance the #MugabeMustFall against former President Mugabe‟s government. Therefore, such an increase in data usage may have been attributed to the fact that various people across the country were at that moment using the internet for the purposes of

3 See Murambadoro, R et al (2015) ICTs and Human Rights In

Africa. Policy Brief No.1/2015. Available at: https://governanceinnovation.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/GovInn-Policy-Brief-1-2015.pdf. 4 NewsDay (14 December 2017) Available at:

https://www.newsday.co.zw/2017/12/zigf-meet-zim-digital-future/

4 | P a g e

getting updates pertaining to the protests that were initiated online by social movement groups. Thus the internet has been in use as an instrument for promoting grassroots democracy by airing local issues, providing an alternative source of information to official channels, thus reflecting human rights and democracy promotion in the country.

Social movement protests against former president Robert Mugabe‟s government were purely organized through social media. For instance, on the 6

th of July 2016, Evan Mawarire‟s #ThisFlag

movement resulted in national boycott by workers which almost shutdown government, citizens stayed at home with banks and shops across all towns and cities closed. The event drew the attention of the whole world. Such mass protests against Mugabe were mainly spearheaded by the social media particularly Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp to demand government transparency and accountability, thereby standing against corruption, poverty and injustice. This clearly shows that social media is playing a central role in shaping the political processes in Zimbabwe. Consequently, freedom of speech courtesy of internet access and use by social movements is enjoyed though facing state sabotage as shown in the government‟s reaction through an unprecedented social media blackout that occurred on the morning of July 6, 2016, the same day when Zimbabwe experienced a stay away, a non-violent form of protest against the economic and political situation currently prevailing in the country. During such a social media blackout, subscribers to key mobile telephony service providers such as: Telecel, NetOne, ZOL, TelOne ADSL and Econet could not access their WhatsApp accounts. They were denied their constitutional right to access information particularly on the internet by this blackout.

In the context of the described background, this study sought to examine the extent to which entities and agencies responsible for promoting human rights and democracy have adopted internet (social media) use for the purpose of promoting democracy in Zimbabwe. The aim was to identify strengths and gaps in internet reliance for promoting democracy and human rights across the country so as to use such to inform strategic planning and activity implementation for maximum impact and effectiveness. Thus, key players in the struggle for democracy and respect for human rights were identified among government institutions, civil society, media fraternity, political parties and social movements and an internet use for human rights

and democracy promotion conceptual framework was created and used as an assessment tool as presented here below.

Research Objectives

This research-based advocacy paper is a continuation of the ZDI-Media Centre research project on the nature of internet freedom and use to promote human rights and democracy in Zimbabwe whose first publication that examined the nature of internet governance framework in Zimbabwe was published on the 30

th of November 2017.

5 In this

series, ZDI and Media Centre examined: (i) background political challenges to internet use for promoting human rights and democracy; (ii) the extent of internet use for promoting democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe by key democracy promotion institutions and actors in Zimbabwe given the prevailing political context (internet culture)

6

and; (iii) a strategy for internet use in monitoring and promoting human rights, citizen agency and accountability in Zimbabwe under the existent political context.

The intention was to identify the internet culture, strengths and weaknesses that can be considered in planning an internet-centered activism ahead of 2018 elections and thereafter. The end is to ensure that all pro-democracy and human rights promoting institutions are: (a) encouraged and motivated through research to adopt a participatory internet culture, use the internet in their activities and; (b) given a clear roadmap through empirical recommendations to enhance their effectiveness in tackling human rights and democratization tasks in Zimbabwe using the internet.

5 NB: For a full copy of the paper, visit ZDI offices and get a hard

copy for free or request a copy by emailing zditrust@gmail.com or simply visit: http://kubatana.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/zdi_media_centre_state_internet_freedom_1712.pdf. 6 By „democracy promoting entities‟ this study deliberately uses

this term to refer to those Zimbabwean state and non-state institutions whose mandate or raison d'etre, as stipulated in their statutes, is to promote human rights and democracy in Zimbabwe.

5 | P a g e

2. RESEARCH STRATEGY

The study conducted a quantitative data analysis of

internet use and reliance by purposively sampled

key democracy promoting actors in Zimbabwe.

Focus group discussions where then used as a

follow up study to unpack ways through which

limitations identified through quantitative analyses

can be dealt with and solicit input on key strategies

that can be used to create an internet based

approach to monitoring, documenting and reporting

on human rights and democracy issues towards a

sustainable transition to a democratic dispensation

in Zimbabwe. As demonstrated in figure 1.1 below,

objects of the study (democracy promoting actors)

were first stratified into following strata to ease

analysis: civic society, government institutions,

media and political parties.

Source: Data Analysis.

Under each stratum, entities ranked as first,

second, third largest and so on7 in that strata were

purposefully sampled and examined. Thus, a total

of 12 key democracy promoting institutions in

Zimbabwe were examined to come out with the

findings of this study.

7This was done through comparing prominence, visibility and

output of each entity as far as promoting democracy and/or human rights is concerned.

Table 1: Classification of Sampled Entities

according to Operational Capacity

Stratum Capacity Rankings (largest to least)

Name of sampled Entities

Media-specific CSOs

2nd

MAZ8

1st

MISA9

CSOs (Human Rights and Democracy)

1st

AIZ

4th

HZT

3rd

ZLHR

2nd

ZHRNGOF

5th

NERA10

Government Institutions

1st

Zim Parliament

2nd

ZHRC11

Political Parties

1st

ZANU-PF12

2nd

MDC-T

3rd

MDC-N13

Source: Data Analysis

To evaluate the extent of internet use for promoting

democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe by key

democracy promotion institutions and actors in

Zimbabwe, the following framework of analysis was

used to evaluate the extent of internet use to

promote human rights and democracy.

8 Twitter, Facebook, Website and Email

9 Twitter (@misazimbabwe), Facebook (MISA Zimbabwe),

Website (http://zimbabwe.misa.org/) & Email (misa@misazim.co.zw) 10

Twitter and Facebook 11

Website ,YouTube 12

ZANU-PF is available on facebook, tweeter, google+, LinkedIn, Zanu- PF website and YouTube. However, they are most active on the website, facebook and tweeter. 13

MDC Ncube uses facebook, tweeter, a website, instagram, YouTube and Whatsapp

Figure1: Stratification of the Sample

Govt Institutions

CSOs (Democracy& Human rights)

Political Parties

Media-specificCSOs

6 | P a g e

Table2: Conceptual Framework for Analyzing the

Extent of Internet Use for Promoting Human Rights

and Democracy

Indicator(s) Extent of HR& Democracy promotion online

14

[1] Online presence15

Number of online media platforms used

[2] Activity & visibility online

16

Number of HR, Accountability & rule of law monitoring posts per month

[3] Online civic education & awareness

17

Number of online HR, accountability & rule of law awareness publication per month

[4] Extent of online Outreach

18

Number of followers

14

It should be noted that “democracy” is not limited to accountability and rule of law but this study liberally chose these two basic tenets of democracy for to ensure practicability of the study given the resources at hand and the time factor. It is our belief that with these two, democracy is represented because without them, democracy can neither be expected nor imagined. 15

This includes social media, online blogs, WebPages whose purpose includes advocacy and information sharing from January 2017-December 2017. This indicator seeks to measure the extent of internet uptake by democracy and human rights promoting entities. More online platforms run by a sampled entity mean a greater degree of online presence. 16

This indicator sought to ascertain the extent to which democracy and human rights institutions use their online presence to promote democracy and human rights. Thus, the frequency of institutional posts and updates that relate to Human rights, accountability and rule of law monitoring and promotion online is measured by counting daily posts for the year ending December 2017 and given as a monthly average. A single post posted in various media sites of an institution is counted as a single post. 17

All online human rights and democracy publications for the year 2017 are counted and the number is given as a monthly average. 18

To come up with the number of followers, the study deliberately selected one online site of a particular institution with the largest number of followers and used it. This meant to prevent double counting of followers who appear in multiple online media sites of the same institution.

3. RESEARCH FINDINGS

1. Extent of Online Presence among Democracy

& Human Rights Entities in Zimbabwe

Generally, the study found that democracy

promoting entities have a have a satisfactory score

in terms of their “online” presence.19

All leading

democracy and human rights promoting entities in

the civic society, media fraternity, government and

political parties have adopted internet platforms for

visibility and wide-reach purposes.20

Figure 1.2

below presents this in a graphic analysis.

Source: Data Analysis.

However, government institutions mandated to

promote human rights and democracy in Zimbabwe

(particularly ZHRC) seem to be legging behind in

terms of online presence. This goes contrary to

expectations, these institutions ought to be “more

online” than shown if their impact is to be felt across

sectors in Zimbabwe.

Four points were given by discussants buttressing

their calls for an increase in the state of online

19

A score grid with 4 categories was used. Categories were as follows: (i) None existent; (ii) poor (1 online site); (iii) better (2-3 online sites); (iv) Satisfactory (4 and above sites online). 20

Focus Group Discussions, December 2017.

0 2 4 6 8

Media-specificCSOs

CSOs (Humanrights&…

Political Parties

Govt Institutions

Number of online platforms per entity within a strata of the sample

Stra

tum

s o

f th

e Sa

mp

le

Figure 2: Extent of Online Presence

5th

4th

3rd

2nd

1st

7 | P a g e

presence of the ZHRC and ZACC. It was argued

that internet uptake: (i) increases public awareness

of institutional remedies in cases of human rights

violations and corruption particularly in remote

areas of Zimbabwe where concerns of victims on

human rights and public office abuses hardly make

it to mainstream media; (ii) improves accessibility,

effectiveness and access to information about

human rights violations and corruption as victims

from remote areas across the country can be able

to personally interact with commissioners online; (iii)

improves citizens‟ participation in monitoring human

rights and corruption and engaging government

agencies and duty-bearers directly on issues

affecting their constitutional rights and; (iv)

enhances the effectiveness of ZHRC and ZACC as

their communication, civic education material and

condemnation statements will be assured of

reaching a wider cross-section of the population.21

In this regard, it is strongly advisable that state

commissions responsible for building and

consolidating democracy and human rights should

lead by example in taking advantage of availed

internet opportunities and spaces.

From our analysis, it emerged that political parties

show to be doing much better than CSOs and

government institution in increasing their online

presence. This entails that, at the moment, political

parties can have wider reach to Zimbabweans when

utilized to promote democracy and human rights

than CSOs and GIs. It was also revealed that

political parties have Whatsapp groups for their cell

members, ward coordinators, district coordinators,

constituency coordinators and national

coordinators.22

This gives them the ability to have

greater influence in Zimbabwe and better

effectiveness if utilized to monitor human rights and

accountability.

However, after debating the impacts this has on

human rights and democracy in Zimbabwe, it

emerged that, three challenges have been

associated with this “better online presence” of

political parties particularly the ruling ZANU-PF.

Those challenges are that: (i) it gives them more

capacity to mobilize and perpetrate human rights

21

Focus Group discussions, December 2017. 22

Focus Group Discussions, December 2017.

violations without being met with counter efforts

from CSOs; (ii) it empowers them to sabotage civic

activism aimed at promoting human rights online

through giving counter activism that discourages

and tweaks citizens‟ attention to pertinent human

rights and accountability issues and; (iii) it

emboldens their efforts in spreading propaganda

and misinformation in defense of corrupt public

officials.23

Thus, as argued by key informants, it

should be noted that online presence cannot be

construed to online activity to promote human rights

and democracy. Different entities go online for

various purposes. Although, the more the presence

of an entity online, the better is its visibility among

online citizens. The same applies to its capacity to

promote human rights violations, corruption and

passive political culture among citizens. So, the

findings of this study indicate that, although CSOs

are many and visible online, political parties are

more visible and CSOs have to work hard to reach

the visibility rankings of political parties and be able

to neutralize counter democracy content and

influence spread by some political parties online

particularly by pressuring political parties to serve

as agents for democracy too.24

2. Extent of Online Human Rights &Democracy

Promotion in Zimbabwe

Considering the fact that “online presence” of an

entity cannot be misconstrued to online human

rights and democracy promotion, this study

analyzed daily posts that have to do with

monitoring, reporting and promoting human rights

and democracy (accountability and rule of law)

posted by sampled entities in their identified online

platforms in year 2017as figure 3 below presents.

23

Focus Group Discussions, December 2017. It was revealed that Zanu-PF has deployed its internet activists used to attack human rights activists, de-campaign human rights work online and oppose any message that contradicts vested interests of President Emerson Mnangagwa‟s administration. 24

Focus Group Discussions, December 2017.

8 | P a g e

Source: Research Data25

In cognizance of above data, it can be stated that

among institutions expected to promote democracy

and human rights through online platforms, CSOs

were the most active with around three posts per-

day in 2017. This also dovetails with our previous

observation that political parties are indeed “more

present” online but their intention for that presence

is not primarily to promote human rights,

accountability and the rule of law but to seek

support from the masses by any means convenient

to them.

Within the sampled CSO strata, media specific

CSOs and social movements were discovered to be

the most active in promoting human rights, rule of

law and accountability online with monthly posts

ranging from 130-162 on these issues. This might

be due to the fact that, media organizations and

social movements have been leading in entering

social media for publicity and recruitment purposes.

25

Based on social media and website posts

What this entails is that, these organizations should

be relied upon in influencing and encouraging other

institutions to intensify internet use for promoting

human rights and democracy through convening

multi-stakeholder conferences, press conferences

and learning symposium aimed at inducing internet

uptake.

However, three to four posts per day(as the monthly

average shows) are not enough for institutions

committed to the cause of increasing transparency

about human rights, rule of law and democracy in

the whole of Zimbabwe. Worse, political parties and

government institutions had insignificant posts on

these issues ranging from 0-6 per month in 2017.

What this entails is that, internet use for promoting

democracy and human rights is still limited in

Zimbabwe.

Discussion on the causes of this below expectation

online performance by human rights and democracy

promoting entities revealed that: (i) there is no

sufficient (if any) institutional funding earmarked for

promoting online activism, monitoring and reporting

among these institutions, thus no human resources

are recruited for the sole purpose of covering

human rights activism, accountability and rule of law

monitoring online; (ii) there is serious self-

censorship online caused by repressive state

legislation, police harassments and institutional

treats resulting in de-escalating civic activity online

and; (iii) shortage of human resource skills,

equipment and will to promote civic activism, human

rights, accountability and rule of law monitoring

online for these institutions.26

Thus, there is need to

sensitize, encourage and promote internet uptake,

reliance and awareness among key players in

Zimbabwe. If political parties are targeted, trained

and reformed, human rights and democracy

monitoring and promotion will be increased given

their greater online presence, number of „online‟

followers and social media webs that net across the

country.

26

Focus Group discussions, December 2017.

Media-specific

CSOs

CSOs(Humanrights&

Democracy)

PoliticalParties

GovtInstitutions

1st 136 24 2 3

2nd 160 42 3 6

3rd 10 4

4th 42

5th 162

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Figure 3: Average Human Rights and Democracy Promotion Content Posted Per month in 2017

9 | P a g e

3. Extent of Civic Education Online

To ensure sustainability and deepened human

rights and democracy in a nation-state, civic

education on these is pivotal. It saws seeds of

sustained transition to a democratic dispensation by

imparting civic agency skills, enthusiasm,

knowledge and culture among masses. The internet

and social media have created a situation where

mobilizing and reaching large numbers of citizens

for civic education purposes has been made

possible, convenient and instant. Thus, entities

committed to promotion of democracy and human

rights should do so through civic education and the

internet has provided a platform through which

citizens can be easily mobilized and educated

through online print or video civic education

publications. This study researched civic education

videos and publications posted in online platforms

of sampled entities so as to determine the extent to

which these entities have actually utilized the

opportunity presented by massive followers on

social media to conduct civic education. Below is an

examination of the extent of online civic education

activities among sampled democracy promoting

entities in Zimbabwe.

Source: Data analysis

It was revealed that the majority of sampled entities

are not doing much to promote civic education

online,27

content found ranges from 0-6 publications

per month. This is so notwithstanding the following

enabling circumstances that ought to motivate these

institutions to do more civic education work online

with assured impact. These are that: (i) above 70%

of the population are youth in need of civic

education;28

(ii) above 50% internet (social media)

users are youths;29

(iii) above 50% of rural-to-urban

migration is comprised by youths30

, thus they have

access to internet; (iv) above 50% eligible voters

are youth31

, they can change electoral outcomes if

influenced and educated to support democracy; (v)

youth are the most used social strata in perpetrating

human rights violations;32

(vi) internet access

through mobile telephony has spread throughout

the country33

, rural citizens who comprise above

70% of the population and have been left behind

during previous civic education activities are now

reachable for civic education through WhatsApp

groups and networks. Thus, there is much yet to be

done to encourage civic education publications

online by democracy and human rights promoting

entities in Zimbabwe to enhance respect and

monitoring of the same.

4. ‘Online Impact Capacity’ of Entities

Promoting Human Rights & Democracy in

Zimbabwe

However, no matter how visible, publishing and

active an entity might be online; its impact cannot

27

Focus Group Discussions, December 2017. 28

Research and Advocacy Unit. 2017. Framing the debate: youth voter registration in Zimbabwe in preparation for 2018 elections. Available Online at: http://researchandadvocacyunit.org/system/files/Framing%20the%20debate%20Youth%20voter%20registration%20in%20Zimbabwe%20-%20Opinion%20piece%201_17%20final.pdf 29

Postal and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe (POTRAZ) Abridged Postal and Telecommunications Sector 3

rd Report, 2017. Available Online at:

http://www.potraz.gov.zw/images/documents/3rd_Quarter_2017.pdf 30

News Day Zimbabwe. 01/07/2014. Stemming Zimbabwe‟s Urban Influx. Available at:https://www.newsday.co.zw/stemming-zimbabwes-urban-influx/. [Accessed 19/02/2018]. 31

See note 1 32

Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum Elections report, 2008. Available Online at: http://www.hrforumzim.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/200812MPVR.pdf 33

See note 2.

Media-specific

CSOs

CSOs(Humanrights&Democr

acy)

PoliticalParties

GovtInstituti

ons

1st 3 2 1 2

2nd 3 2 1 0

3rd 4 2

4th 2

5th 6

01234567

Nu

mb

er

of

on

lin

e h

um

an

rig

hts

, ru

le o

f la

w a

nd

A

cco

un

tab

ilit

y c

ivic

ed

ucati

on

p

ub

licati

on

s p

er

mo

nth

Sampled HR&Democracy Institutions

Figure 4: Extent of online civic education in 2017

10 | P a g e

be assured if it has a limited audience or followers

who serve as direct recipients and certain

consumers of its human rights and democracy

content outputs. Increasing online impact capacity

is therefore vital. To determine online impact

capacity, the study assessed the number of citizens

(followers) that each entity can instantly and directly

engage and reach when disbursing and seeking

information on human rights, rule of law and

accountability online. Following is a graphic

presentation of this analysis.

Source: Data Analysis

These figures indicate that political parties have

large numbers of online followers compared to

CSOs and GIs. It follows that their activities and

initiatives have a wider outreach and citizen

engagement. It should be noted that sampled CSOs

reach less than 1% of the population estimate in

Zimbabwe notwithstanding the fact that most of

them share same followers. Among key causes of

this dismal outreach was lack of human and

financial resources to assist in scaling up internet

activities.34

34

Focus Group Discussions with CSOs, January 2018.

4. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusion

This study concludes that internet use and reliance

for promoting democracy and human rights remains

limited in Zimbabwe. The political and legal

environment is to as greater extent the key factor

inhibiting the extent of human rights and democracy

promotion online. Civic organizations have shown

serious self-censorship online in fear of usual

repressive consequences. The government has key

institutions earmarked for promoting and

consolidating democracy and human rights such as

the ZHRC, ZACC and Parliament of Zimbabwe but

they have an insignificant extent of „online

presence‟, activity, civic education and impact

capacity. This needs to be changed if human rights

are to be deepened and democracy promoted. The

poor economic situation in Zimbabwe has also

contributed to poor internet access by a large cross-

section of unemployed, poor and marginalized

people of Zimbabwe. Political parties, particularly

the ruling party ZANU-PF have been instrumental in

discouraging civic activism, demonizing human

rights efforts and protecting corrupt officials from

accountability demands online. There is need to

increase activism against such vices.

Recommendations

Government

It should repeal or amend unconstitutional

legislation like AIPPA, POSA, BSA, and revise

the Cyber Crimes bill to ensure conformity with

the constitution and international standards on

human rights and internet freedoms.

It should ensure that institutions mandated to

promote human rights; accountability and the

rule of law such as the ZACC and the ZHRC,

ZMC are present, accessible and interactive

online. There is need for serious policy

emphasis on internet use, internet freedom to

access government information and

transparency.

It should be open and available for engagement

forums with CSOs, citizens and academics to

enable information sharing, skills sharing and

interactive problem solving.

Media-specific

CSOs

CSOs(Humanrights&Democr

acy)

PoliticalParties

GovtInstituti

ons

1st 19126 2163 19768 33100

2nd 6500 3945 133895 0

3rd 27900 21287

4th 13427

5th 14473

020000400006000080000

100000120000140000160000

Nu

mb

er

of

on

lin

e f

ollo

wers

Sampled HR&Democracy Institutions

Figure 5: Extent of Online Impact Capacity among Sampled Entities

11 | P a g e

It should liaise with NGOs and the private

sector in increasing internet access to, and

promoting internet use in remote and

marginalized communities of Zimbabwe.

It should punish and discourage sabotage

activities of political actors that counter CSOs‟

efforts to promote human rights, accountability

and rule of law online.

Civic Society

It should increase pressure on government to

revise and reform legislation to free the internet

and civic activities therein.

Should widely name, expose and shame law

enforcers that compromise internet freedoms in

Zimbabwe.

It should increase pressure and lobbying for the

revision of the Cyber Crime Bill so that when it

gets to enactment stage; it will be in conformity

with the provisions of the constitution and

international human rights standards.

It should promote and conduct activism on

internet use in monitoring, reporting and

challenging human rights abuses, accountability

and rule of law violations.

It should increase civic education online and

create internet based networks that stretch to

rural areas and marginalized social groups such

as youth, women and people with disabilities

with the intention of encouraging internet use

for demanding and monitoring accountability,

human rights monitoring and citizen-

government dialoguing.

Should increase its online impact capacity by

conducting cross-country outreach programs

focusing on civic education, recruitment of

citizen journalists and whistleblowers and

encouraging locally coordinated networks on

social media for the purpose of monitoring and

reporting human rights, accountability and rule

of law situations across Zimbabwe.

It should conduct civic activism against online

sabotage activities done by certain political

parties to suppress citizen agency, citizen

participation in naming and shaming corruption

and human rights violations done by duty-

bearers in their communities.

Should pressure political parties and players to

use their internet networks and social media

groups across the country to facilitate civic

education, human rights and accountability

monitoring and reporting.

Political Parties

They should capitalize on their strong online

presence to increase human rights,

accountability and rule of law demands,

monitoring and reporting.

They should coalesce to increase pressure for

internet freedom reforms in the legal and political

system of Zimbabwe.

They should support and promote citizen-

government engagement online taking

advantage of their country-wide social media

groups that stretch from village cell level, district,

and province and national level to initiate intra-

party dialogues online. The spillovers from these

intra-party internet access, use and promotion

dialogues will increase internet use in the

country as a whole.

They should desist from counter democracy

activities and cultivate connections,

engagements and cooperation with CSOs in

promoting civic education online.

12 | P a g e

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gadzikwa, J. 2015. Interactivity and Cyber

democracy: The case of Zimbabwe’s

Online Newspapers. Available at

http://www.academicjournals.org/journal/JMCS/artic

le-full-text-pdf/933970B51554.

Murambadoro, R et al .2015. ICTs and Human

Rights In Africa. Policy Brief No.1/2015. Available

at: https://governanceinnovation.org/wordpress/wp-

content/uploads/2015/08/GovInn-Policy-Brief-1-

2015.pdf

Postal and Telecommunications Regulatory

Authority of Zimbabwe. 2017. Abridged Postal and

Telecommunications Sector Performance Report 3rd

Quarter Report. [Online]. Available

at:http://www.potraz.gov.zw/images/documents/3rd

_Quarter_2017.pdf. [Accessed: 19/02/2018]

Research and Advocacy Unit. 2017. Framing the

debate: youth voter registration in Zimbabwe in

preparation for 2018 elections. [Online].Available

at:http://researchandadvocacyunit.org/system/files/

Framing%20the%20debate%20Youth%20voter%20

registration%20in%20Zimbabwe%20-

%20Opinion%20piece%201_17%20final.pdf.

[Accessed: 19/02/2018].

Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum. 2008.

Political Violence Report 2008. [Online]. Available

at: http://www.hrforumzim.org/wp-

content/uploads/2010/06/200812MPVR.pdf.

[Accessed: 19/02/18].