Koketso Moeti
Koketso Moeti

Why the silence on the right to internet access?

The United Nations Human Rights Council has in the past called the right to freedom and expression “one of the essential foundations of a democratic society”. It has recognised the internet’s importance in the “promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression”. This subsequently led to a landmark resolution, which saw the United Nations declare internet access a human right because of the vast potential and benefits of the internet.

Despite this, the right to internet access, also known as the right to broadband, is a right that often goes ignored in South Africa. In May 2012, research conducted by World Wide Worx found internet penetration in SA to be nearing 20%. This was been attributed to the spread of smartphones and ordinary cellphones with internet connectivity.

This is however a very low figure, more so considering that the internet, if used well, can be an important tool in changing lives for the better. Not only can it be used to disseminate information and stories, but also to access government and other institutions, which would ordinarily be out of reach. It can also serve as an enabler in organising not only communities, but also beyond the territorial confines of the usual community borders. The internet also provides access to information, which at a local level can be something as simple as finding out where the nearest police station is located. This may seem insignificant to some, but to those in these realities, it makes all the difference.

The internet is also having an impact not only in individual lives and in communities, but civil-society organisations are increasingly turning to the net to raise awareness about their programmes and work, as well as for fundraising purposes. Also, civil-society organisations seem to be awakening to the possibilities it holds, particularly as we explore the intersections between media, technology and the non-profit sector.

The impact of the internet, if used appropriately, can also transform the non-profit sector. Instead of claiming to be “the voice of the voiceless”, the sector can actually amplify the voices of those they serve. This is important as people are not voiceless, it more often than not a matter of not being heard due to social exclusion. This means the internet can play a very important role in legitimising the important role that civil-society organisations play in the country.

My concern is that despite the huge leaps being made by civil-society organisations to recognise the possibilities of the internet, I am not hearing enough about access or better yet, penetration, as access alone is not enough considering factors such as cost. The best apps and other digital tools on earth can be developed to link civil-society organisations to those they serve, but without internet penetration, possibilities are rather limited. Civil society across sectors should be joining hands to demand universal access for citizens.

It is not enough to occasionally raise the topic, as a sector, we need to come up with a united, coherent campaign on the matter. A campaign that also seeks to address location-based, socio-economic and the gender digital divide in SA.

A lone voice in the desert can be ignored, but not a united front demanding this right. It can be argued that there are bigger battles to be fought in South Africa but it cannot be ignored that the fulfilment of the right to internet access potentially can have a positive impact on the fulfilment of other human rights.

This article was first published on NGO Pulse

Tags: ,

  • Why ‘freedom’ sells
  • Can SA, India and Brazil reboot the global human-rights narrative?
  • Voices from Kagiso: Community says Mintails’ suspension is a smokescreen
  • Asylum in Germany, asylum in SA: Is there justice and humanity?
  • 2 Responses to “Why the silence on the right to internet access?”

    1. Robard #

      Internet access can only be a “human right” in the sense that freedom of expression is a right. It means that the citizen may not be prevented from using the internet to publish his opinion in the same way as he may not be prevented from publishing newspapers, pamphlets or books. To say that it obliges the government to provide (free) internet access to its citizens undermines and weakens the very foundation of human rights, which is to shield the citizen against its government. Such a far reaching obligation on government would in fact require the sacrifice of the even more fundamental right to own property, as government cannot provide any economic goods to some people without taking it away from someone else.

      July 10, 2013 at 2:16 pm
    2. Stephen Browne #

      Probably better to tackle this from a more practical direction – demand that government relinquish it’s monopoly on telecom infrastructure. Until then we’ll be waiting for Youtube to load until the cows come home. Telkom is now upgrading to VDSL (only a good decade behind the rest of the world) which is going to out the price range of 99% of the population.

      July 11, 2013 at 12:32 pm

    Leave a Reply

     characters available