Regulating Social Media Is Not Repression, Uganda Is Acting Within Global Norms

In recent days, global attention has been drawn to the case of Elson Tumwine, a Ugandan university student who allegedly resurfaced in prison after posting a TikTok video insulting the person of President Yoweri Museveni. His disappearance and subsequent detention have reignited international debate on digital freedoms and the regulation of online expression in Uganda.

However, while foreign media platforms like the BBC have been quick to frame this as an attack on freedom of expression, it is important to examine the broader global context. Many countries, including those that criticize Uganda, have put in place far-reaching measures to scrutinize and even penalize individuals based on their social media activity.

Uganda is not alone in recognizing that the digital space must be governed. And like other nations, it has taken steps to ensure that the freedom to express oneself does not come at the expense of national stability, public order, or the rights of others.

Social Media as a Growing Tool for Border Control

Around the world, the scrutiny of social media activity is no longer unusual. Countries have tightened immigration, visa, and security protocols to include a review of applicants’ digital footprints.

The U.S. Embassy in Nairobi recently issued a reminder that: “Visa applicants are required to list all social media usernames or handles of every platform they have used in the last 5 years. Omission could lead to visa denial and ineligibility for future U.S. visas.”

This policy allows authorities to deny entry simply based on online content, even if it is several years old. If your posts are deemed aggressive, controversial, or inconsistent with national interests, you may never get past the embassy gate.

If this is accepted elsewhere, why should Uganda’s internal efforts to promote accountability on social media be treated as repression?

What Uganda is doing, through legislation like the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act, 2022, mirrors a broader global trend. Nations are no longer ignoring the real-world impact of digital content. Uganda, like many others, is stepping up to protect national harmony, identity, and public safety.

Uganda’s Position: Criminalizing Misuse, Not Opinion

Uganda’s Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act, 2022, particularly Section 26D, was designed to curb digital abuse, not stifle free thought. The law targets those who:

1. Use false or disguised identities to post harmful content
2. Spread prohibited information such as hate speech or incitement
3. Operate anonymously to defame, harass, or intimidate others

It further states that where content is traced to a registered phone number or email address, the account holder may be held responsible under the law. This ensures accountability and transparency in the use of digital platforms, values that every democratic society should uphold.

Importantly, this law does not criminalize criticism, opinion, or activism. It only seeks to ensure that individuals are responsible for what they publish online, especially when doing so under pretenses or with harmful intent.

Setting the Record Straight: Uganda’s Laws Are Clear and Necessary

Contrary to claims made in international media, Uganda’s legal framework for regulating digital spaces is not designed to silence dissent or criminalize opinion, but to protect citizens, maintain public order, and ensure accountability in the digital age.

Laws like the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Act serve a critical role in addressing emerging threats such as cyberbullying, digital impersonation, misinformation, and online incitement, threats that every modern society must confront.

The enforcement of these laws follows clear procedures and is guided by established legal standards. Those who claim that such regulations are meant to suppress freedoms often ignore the broader context that social media, if left unchecked, can be used to mobilize harmful behavior, spread hate, or destabilize societies.

In the end, if other countries can lawfully scrutinize your digital footprint before granting entry, then Uganda’s decision to regulate online speech is not only justified, it is responsible governance in the digital age.

Freedom of expression must be protected, yes, but freedom without responsibility is a threat to order and national unity. Uganda’s laws reflect that delicate and necessary balance.