National Security & Phone- What is Phone-tapping? tapping in Uganda •Monitoring of telephone & Internet conversations by a third party often by covert means entailing the act of electronically intercepting conversations without the knowledge or consent of at least one of the participants Why has there been a surge in What does the Law say about Phone-tapping by the Security Agencies in Uganda? Phone-tapping in Uganda? Municipal Law •The ‘fight against terrorism’, •Constitution protects the right to privacy in communication & correspondence, Art. 27(2), •Increased organized crime, •Art.41 of the Constitution guarantees the right to Information, •Art.221 obliges security organs of the State to observe human rights in the conduct of their activities, •Persistent armed rebellion esp. in Northern Uganda by Joseph •Sections 18, 19, 20, 21, & 22 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2002, provide for Phone-tapping, Kony’s LRA rebels •Section 32 of the Access to Information Act No.6/2005 provides for the right to Information Uganda’s HR Obligations in Proposed Interception of International Law Communications Bill, 2007 International Human Rights Obligations •Intended to Operationalise Sections 18, 19, 20, 21, & 22 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2002, on Phone-tapping •UDHR, Art. 12, •Bill was shelved owing to the severe criticism it attracted upon its publication in the Uganda Gazette on 25th May, 2007, •ICCPR, Art. 17 •Also shelved in light of the then impending very important CHOGMmeeting, •ACHRP also, •Despite the EAC Treaty on Uniform legislation in E. Africa on issues like Security, Uganda is the only country in E.A. with such a legislation [strong relations with the US, & UK] •Uganda is a signatory to all these International HR instruments and is duty bound as a State Party to respect A look at Other Africa Countries Africa & Beyond with Similar Legislation •S. Africa – Regulation of Interception of Communications & Provision of Communications •Outside Africa, the USA, UK, Canada, Japan, Hongkong, & India, Act, No. 70/2000 related to the Information Act, 2002, among others have similar legislation on Phone-tapping, •Zimbabwe – Interception of Communications Bill passed in 2006, •The only difference being that the latter countries provide for •Egypt has a similar law, judicial review on Phone-tapping unlike Uganda which seeks to •Angola – is said to have used Phone-tapping to track fallen rebel leader Jonas Savimbi, have all the powers on Phone-tapping under the Minister of Security! Liberal vs. Radical Democracies Way forward for Uganda in the in the Fight against Terrorism Fight against Terrorism •Merely military & police action not enough, •Liberal democracies, Canada & the Scandinavia, with a keen interest in the observance of HRs even in the fight against terrorism, •Address internal strife, wars, political discontent, power sharing btn the central & regional gov’ts etc., •Revisit the neo-liberalist policies pursued by the IMF, WB, WIPO, WTO, & the SAPs etc., •Radical democracies, US & UK, with minimum interest in the observance of HRs in the fight against terrorism; •Co-operation/co-existence with our neighbours, Rwanda, DR Congo, Sudan, Kenya, etc., •Avoid open alliance with terrorist prone/target countries like the US & UK, to avoid revenge & ‘Soft-target’ attacks from •See, for example, the Surveillance Bill, 2007 in the US, & also the 2007 Data the enemies of the two-supers, Protection UK fiasco Conclusion •Uganda should take the course taken by the liberal democracies like Canada & the Scandinavia; the two jurisdictions have shown that even in the fight against terrorism & organized crime, it is still possible to uphold their citizens ’ fundamental rights to privacy in correspondence, communication & data protection.