Nelson Kwaje, head of Digital Rights Frontlines (left), and Wani Steven, Deputy Secretary General of the South Sudan Bar Association, during a discussion on the Dawn Show. Photo credit: Darlington Moses

Advocates have welcomed President Salva Kiir’s decision to sign the Cybercrime and Computer Misuse Act into law, describing it as a long-awaited step to regulate online conduct in South Sudan.

The campaigners say the new legislation addresses a long-standing legal gap in the country’s digital space.

On Wednesday, President Kiir signed the Act into law. The legislation had faced criticism from some activists who warned it could be used to limit political freedom and free speech.

Wani Steven, Deputy Secretary General of the South Sudan Bar Association, said the new law marks an important milestone in the country’s legal history.

He noted that since independence, South Sudan has operated without a comprehensive Act of Parliament regulating conduct in cyberspace.

“We have lived in a legal vacuum for quite a long time. Since our independence, we did not have any comprehensive act of parliament that regulates conduct of cyberspace.

“So, this is really something that is long overdue. And I am glad that parliament has passed this law and the President signed it,” he Wani said.

The new Act criminalizes offences such as unauthorized data transmission, hacking, espionage, cyberterrorism, and economic sabotage.

It also prohibits the creation of fake websites and social media accounts, publication of false information and indecent content, online impersonation, and gender-based harassment.

Wani said the law is necessary to regulate cyberspace and strengthen protection against online crimes.

Meanwhile, digital rights advocate Nelson Kwaje, who chairs Digital Rights Frontlines, described the legislation as a “step forward” in tackling cybercrime and misuse of digital technologies.

However, Kwaje cautioned that the law is not perfect and contains vague provisions that could be misused.

“This might not be the most perfect law right now, because there are areas that are still grey, that are a bit vague, which can at times lead to security agencies using this or people just suing others for discomfort. The law is supposed to protect against harm, not simply because someone dislikes what has been said,” Kwaje said.

While many see the Act as a necessary development, some advocates stress the need for clear safeguards to ensure it strengthens cybersecurity without undermining fundamental freedoms.