Legalising control: Maurice Schumann on the legal restrictions of digital rights

Internet freedom increasingly hinges on government discretion. Much attention has been given to the technical tools governments use during protests, elections, or conflicts to control digital communication. However, governments are also increasingly establishing legal capacities, often justified as measures against cybercrime or for protecting user privacy, that legitimise surveillance or punish online dissent.

But when do governments enshrine these infringements of digital political and civil rights into law?

Maurice Schumann, PhD candidate at the Hertie School’s Centre for International Security, explores this question by examining whether restrictive internet laws are enacted reactively (e.g. after unrest), or pre-emptively, influenced by domestic and regional factors.

Titled “Legalizing Control: The Rise of Restrictive Internet Regulation in sub-Saharan Africa” and published in Democratization, Schumann’s article analyses an original dataset of 360 internet laws enacted across 44 sub-Saharan African countries between 2000 and 2022. He identifies 227 laws that could limit online privacy and free speech. These restrictive regulations often feature vague language and broad enforcement leeway, enabling governments to suppress dissent under the guise of cybersecurity or digital regulation.

Not reactive, pre-emptive: A legal playbook shared across borders

Crucially, Schumann finds that neither domestic nor regional unrest predicts when such restrictive regulations are passed. Instead, the strongest drivers are regional trends in internet regulation: countries are significantly more likely to introduce restrictive digital laws when neighbouring states in their region have done so. This “learning effect”, a form of policy diffusion, means repressive laws are not just invented but replicated. Anecdotal evidence from Eastern and Central Africa underscores this dynamic: governments not only replicate legal structures but also observe the regional tolerance for digital rights restrictions. Rather than reacting to unrest, these regimes learn from one another, replicating legal restrictions that align with shifting regional norms. As Schumann notes:

“The story of autocratic legalism is often one of autocratic learning.”

Expanding the repertoire of internet control tools

With digital rights increasingly under threat, Schumann's findings highlight that illiberal governments are not just building digital tools but are also expanding legal ones to limit digital rights, often pre-emptively, outside the spotlight of political events and in coordination with regional trends. Building on recent reports by the European Union and civil society organisations, the study highlights how legal restrictions add to the ever-expanding repertoire of government instruments for digital control.

Read the full article in Democratization.