Originally published 2021-01-20.
On the eve of its January 2021 presidential election, Uganda first ordered internet providers to block social media and messaging apps, then cut the country off from the internet almost entirely. Voters went to the polls on 14 January with no Facebook, no WhatsApp and, for most people, no connection at all. President Yoweri Museveni, in power since 1986, was declared the winner two days later. His main rival, the singer turned politician Bobi Wine, rejected the result as fraudulent.
Here is what happened, why the platforms objected so loudly, and why election-time shutdowns matter far beyond Uganda.
What Uganda switched off, and when
The restrictions came in two steps. On 13 January 2021 the communications regulator told telecom companies to block social media and messaging services. Later the same day the government went further and ordered a full internet shutdown, which took effect that evening, the night before the vote.
Ordinary connectivity began to return five days later, after the results had been announced. By 18 January, service was back to roughly nine-tenths of normal levels, but the social platforms stayed blocked. People who wanted to reach them had to use VPNs, and the monitoring group NetBlocks described the restored service as still "less than usable" for many users.
It is worth separating the two measures. Blocking particular apps limits how people organise and share news. Shutting down the whole internet also hits mobile money, banking, businesses and the work of journalists and election observers. Uganda did both within a single day.
Why the government targeted Facebook
The block did not come out of nowhere. Shortly before the regulator's order, Facebook removed a network of accounts that it said was linked to the Ugandan government and was being used to manipulate debate about the election. The government denied the accusation and said the company was interfering in Ugandan politics.
Museveni then publicly accused Facebook of taking sides. In a televised address he reportedly said that a platform taking sides against his party could not operate in Uganda, and he presented the block as a response to what he called the company's arrogance. Twitter had also suspended a batch of accounts it said were targeting the election in coordination with other companies.
Facebook itself was reported to remain inaccessible in Uganda long after other services came back, turning the quarrel into a lasting standoff between the government and the company.
How Twitter and rights groups responded
Twitter's public policy account spoke out on 12 January, the day before the block took effect, saying it was hearing reports that providers were being told to cut off social apps. The company said it strongly condemned internet shutdowns, calling them "hugely harmful" and a violation of basic human rights.
Ahead of the Ugandan election, we're hearing reports that Internet service providers are being ordered to block social media and messaging apps.
— Twitter Public Policy (@Policy) January 12, 2021
We strongly condemn internet shutdowns – they are hugely harmful, violate basic human rights and the principles of the #OpenInternet.
Its broader argument was simple: the free flow of information is never more important than during an election, when voters need to hear from candidates, check claims and report problems at polling stations. Digital rights monitors such as NetBlocks warned that the blackout left citizens in an information vacuum, and UN Watch publicly condemned the election, citing the silencing of opponents, the shutdown and allegations of fraud.
Western governments were also critical. The United States cancelled its plan to observe the vote, citing a lack of transparency, and later described the process as fundamentally flawed. The European Union did not send observers at all, because recommendations it made after Uganda's 2016 election had been ignored.
The election behind the blackout
Official results gave Museveni about 58 percent of the vote and Bobi Wine, whose real name is Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu, about 35 percent. Wine leads the National Unity Platform (NUP). He and his party said ballot boxes had been stuffed and that the shutdown was designed to stop them sharing evidence of fraud. Museveni, for his part, claimed the poll may have been the cleanest in the country's history.
The campaign had been violent. In November 2020, Wine's arrest set off protests in Kampala and other towns. Police acknowledged dozens of deaths, while human rights activists put the toll above 100. On polling day and for more than a week afterwards, soldiers surrounded Wine's home and kept him under what amounted to house arrest, until the High Court ordered them to leave and he was freed on 26 January.
Wine filed a challenge on 1 February 2021, then told his lawyers to withdraw it later that month, saying the courts were biased after photos circulated of the chief justice with the president.
The Trump comparison
The Uganda block landed days after Twitter and Facebook had suspended Donald Trump following the 6 January attack on the US Capitol. Some American commentators accused the companies of hypocrisy: they condemned a government for silencing speech while doing something similar themselves.
The companies saw the two cases very differently. A platform enforcing its own rules against a specific account, in this case one it judged was encouraging violence, is a private moderation decision that leaves the rest of the internet untouched. A state ordering every provider in the country to cut access affects tens of millions of people at once, including those with no political role at all. Reasonable people still argue about how platforms moderate politicians, but the scale and the source of the decision are not the same.
Why election shutdowns matter
Uganda was not acting in isolation. It had already restricted social media during its 2016 election and introduced a daily tax on social media use in 2018. Governments in several other countries have cut access during votes, exams or protests, and researchers who track these events report that shutdowns have become more common, not less.
The costs are practical as well as political:
- Information gaps. Voters, observers and reporters lose the ability to share results from individual polling stations, which is often the best check on official tallies.
- Economic damage. In countries where mobile money is central to daily life, a shutdown stops payments, wages and small-business sales.
- Safety. Families cannot check on one another during unrest, and evidence of abuses is harder to record and publish.
- Workarounds favour the few. VPNs help some users, but they require know-how and data, and they are often the first thing authorities try to block next.
What to take from Uganda's 2021 vote
The January 2021 blackout showed how quickly a government can isolate a whole population at the moment information matters most. It also showed the limits of the tactic: news of the shutdown, the arrests and the disputed count still travelled abroad, and the episode added to international criticism of the election.
For readers following future elections anywhere, the useful questions are concrete. Was access blocked, and for how long? Were particular apps targeted or the whole internet? Who gave the order, and were independent observers allowed in? The answers say a great deal about how free a vote really was.
Sources: Wikipedia: 2021 Ugandan general election; JURIST: Uganda election internet shutdown reversed, social media still barred (19 January 2021); Wikipedia: Bobi Wine; Twitter Public Policy statement (12 January 2021); New York Post (12 January 2021); earlier coverage via Daily Wire.
COMMENTS