SURVEILLANCE: A BITTER PILL IN DIGITAL ADVOCACY

Digital advocacy has undergone a fundamental transformation due to the rapid development of technology use worldwide. This has created an unprecedented environment that allows social movements to mobilize, organize, and magnify their causes at scale. The same technologies empowering advocates also enable unprecedented surveillance and repression.

Human rights defenders face a paradox in that, they must use digital platforms to reach audiences and organize actions, but these same platforms expose them to state monitoring, malware such as Pegasus, and digital international persecution. The 2024 Kenyan protests exemplified this tension where protestors successfully mobilized millions via social media while also confronting digital tracking, arrests based on online activities, and targeted surveillance.

Digital campaigning has become increasingly dangerous for human rights defenders (HRDs) in Africa and around the world, exposing advocates to financial and existential implications such as state-sponsored surveillance, arbitrary arrests, bodily threats, and economic destruction. As witnessed in 2025, Governments undertook extensive surveillance and imprisoned scores of protesters from youth-led social movements in Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Nigeria,Palestine, Nepal, and the United States who organized using social media sites. The crackdown on demonstrations followed activists’ digital footprints, with some disappearing after sharing protest material online.

One of the most serious developing concerns is the normalization of digital monitoring as a means of state control.The spread of spyware and the development of AI based disinformation campaigns have made digital repression more scalable and difficult to detect. For example, using AI to manufacture and disseminate misinformation might enhance the impact of digital attacks, making it impossible for HRDs to differentiate between organic and state-sponsored online abuse.This generates a chilling effect in which activists isolate and abandon advocacy work to avoid being targeted, undermining campaigning efforts.

Another developing issue is the expanding market for mercenary spyware and digital surveillance services. The worldwide spyware market is thriving, with companies selling powerful tools that authoritarian regimes might use to target dissidents abroad.This has produced a new kind of digital arms race, in which the power to conduct surveillance is no longer limited to state actors but may be outsourced to private firms.

Due to the lack of regulation in this industry, there are few protections in place to avoid the misuse of these technology. The requirement for modern digital security measures drives up the cost of digital advocacy. Civil society organizations and their collectives must now invest in sophisticated solutions such as encrypted messaging applications, virtual private networks (VPNs), and secure communication platforms to safeguard their data and communications. However, these instruments are generally costly and necessitate technical knowledge, which many HRDs lack. Maintaining digital security can be prohibitively expensive, particularly among minority groups and individual whistle blowers amidst an emerging decline of global donor funding for civil advocacy initiatives.

In addition, the legal and administrative structures that protect digital rights are frequently insufficient. The existing and emerging digital rights laws and policies are being tailored to favor state surveillance and suppression of dissenting voices disguised as national sfaety and security measures. While some governments, such as the United States, have begun to combat digital transnational repression through the Transnational Repression Accountability and Prevention Act (TRAP Act), the reaction has been inconsistent and frequently ineffective.The lack of international consensus on the regulation of digital surveillance means that HRDs remain exposed to state-sponsored attacks.

Finally, these risks are not limited to financial costs alone, HRDs also face psychological and social threats while using the internet to campaign.To protect HRDs’ digital rights, the international community must work together to address the growing concerns of digital surveillance and repression.To combat digital transnational persecution, legislative frameworks must be strengthened, digital security measures adopted, and international collaboration fostered. Activists must aslo focus on strengthening regional digital rights frameworks by organizing into collective umbrellas aimed at advocating for reforms in repressive legislations such as the computer misuse act. The cost of protection for both individual activists and collective movements is lower compared to the cost of being compromised.