Suchergebnisse

Edward Snowden, a former employee of a subcontractor of the NSA, revealed the US monitoring and data interception programs. This case has changed International Internet Law in many aspects, including two in particular, which are discussed in this article. The Snowden affair has underlined the difficulty encountered by Law in responding to technological specificities of the Big Data. The legal protection of personal data does not always seem adapted to the volume, velocity and heterogeneity of data. While International Human Rights Law has adapted to this new context, a proper Digital Law has been deemed necessary. This essentially soft law has developed specific principles of data accuracy, purpose specification and security safeguards. The trade-offs between competing interests have evolved from the confrontation between national security and fundamental rights, to the opposition between fundamental rights and digital specificities, to the inclusion in legal instruments today of a commercial and horizontal logic in order to take into account the interests of private Net-actors in addition to those of States and their nationals. But the development of legal instruments is not sufficient and it is the whole governance model that should be redesigned. The imbalance inside Internet governance institutions for the benefit of the United States is challenged by some States and international institutions. Earlier proposals of multi-stakeholders and multilateral governance models are difficult to implement. The Snowden case has showed, firstly, that the material and institutional segmentation of governance should make way for integrated governance. Secondly, it demonstrated that against the risk of " Net Balkanization" a distribution-based and networked logic should be developed. It is however still uncertain whether the reflections triggered by this case will lead to a more appropriate and balanced legal framework for Internet activities.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been embraced enthusiastically by Africans as a new resource for African development. AI could improve well-being by enabling innovation in business, education, health, ecology, urban planning, industry, etc. However, the high expectations could be little more than pious wishes. There are still too many open questions regarding the transfer required, and the selection of appropriate technology and its mastery. Given that the 'technology transfer' concept of modernization theories of the 1960s utterly failed because it had not been adapted to local needs, some scholars have called for an endogenous concept of African AI. However, this caused a lot of controversies. Africa became a battlefield of 'digital empires' of global powers due to its virtually non-existent digital infrastructure. Still, African solutions to African problems would be needed. Additionally, the dominant narratives and default settings of AI-related technologies have been denounced as male, gendered, white, heteronormative, powerful, and western. The previous focus on the formal sector is also questionable. Innovators from the informal sector and civil society, embedded in the local sociocultural environment but closely linked to transnational social spaces, often outperform government development efforts. UNESCO also warned that the effective use of AI in Africa requires the appropriate skills, legal framework and infrastructure. As in the past, calls by African politicians for a pooling of resources, a pan-African strategy, were probably in vain. AI may develop fastest in the already established African technology hubs of South Africa, Nigeria and Kenya. But promising AI-focused activities have also been identified in Ethiopia and Uganda. Gender equality, cultural and linguistic diversity, and changes in labour markets would also be required for AI to enhance rather than undermine socioeconomic inclusion. In addition, ethical questions related to a specific African identity have been raised. The extent to which African ideas of humanity and humanitarianism should be taken into account when developing an African AI remains an open question. In short, calling for the rapid deployment of AI in Africa could be a double-edged sword.

Digitalization in Sub-Saharan Africa enhanced the accessibility of communications by the majority of the poor who had been excluded among others from social media, independent information channels, mobile banking and e-commerce. The creation of new economic opportunities, e.g. the pay-as-you-go business, and increased flow of information also boosted people's self-esteem, sense of belonging and citizenship. The smartphone became the main source of internet access which also bridged the divide between urban and rural communities. Thus, mobile telecommunications contributed positively to economic growth even in less developed regions, and there is apparently still ample space for further improvement. Yet, Africans were also confronted with new forms of the digital divide between the poor and the rich, between advanced and less advanced African countries, as well as between Africa and the rest of the world. Moreover, the digitalization of the public sphere became a double-edged sword. Autocratic governments like Sudan and Togo shut down the internet during elections to facilitate the rigging of the polls. The lack of transparency and objectivity fuelled fake news which rapidly spread in social media, notably in times of the Corona crisis. Last, but not least, not everybody surfing in the internet had the same access to quality information. For example, disinformation was supported clandestinely by foreign powers to destabilize political regimes, or spy software was provided to governments to control the opposition. Both false news in social media and spy-software impeded poverty relieve in Africa significantly.