Author: Abigail Nthuba

Imagine waking up tomorrow to a government announcement that, for their own safety, women and girls should stop using social media, smartphones, or the internet. How would you feel?

When I asked high school and law students this question during a recent lecture on Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV), their response was immediate.

“That would be unfair.”

They spoke about everything they would lose: education, economic opportunities, friendships, access to information, and the ability to participate in public life.

Then came the difficult realization.

For many women and girls, this is already happening. No government tells them to leave digital spaces, but fear often does. Women censor themselves, avoid speaking on controversial issues, withdraw from online discussions, or leave platforms altogether because they do not feel safe. That is precisely why conversations about TFGBV violence matter.

TFGBV is defined as violence that is committed, assisted, aggravated, or amplified through information and communication technologies or digital media against a person because of their gender (UNFPA, 2023). It goes beyond what we traditionally called “online violence” because the harm is no longer confined to social media or websites. (Donato, Stellamarina, Hande Eslen-Ziya, and Emiliana Mangone, 2022). These harms rarely remain online. A woman who is stalked through social media may later find herself followed to work by the said stalker. The online and offline worlds are part of the same continuum of violence.

One question I have once received is “If someone hits another person with a car or uses a firearm, does that count because a car or gun is technology?” The answer is no. The term refers specifically to the use of information and communication technologies and digital tools to perpetrate gender-based violence. More importantly, it requires a gendered dimension, where a person is targeted because of their gender or are disproportionately affected.

African courts are beginning to recognise the serious harm caused by TFGBV, but legal responses remain inconsistent and, in many instances, inadequate. In The State v. Elias Musyani (2025) (Zambia), a blogger was convicted for using Facebook to systematically harass and intimidate a woman through a sustained campaign of online abuse. The court sentenced him to six months’ imprisonment and imposed a fine of K70,000. While the conviction marked an important acknowledgement that online abuse can cause real psychological harm and attract criminal liability, the sentence also highlights a broader challenge across many African jurisdictions. Penalties often fail to reflect the gravity of the harm caused by technology-facilitated violence, particularly where victims experience long-term psychological trauma, reputational damage, economic loss, and continued harassment beyond the digital space. Recognition alone is not enough; legal frameworks must also provide sanctions that are proportionate and capable of deterring future abuse.

A similar challenge arises in cross-border cases. In 2026, a high-profile Telegram sextortion case exposed the complexities of prosecuting technology-facilitated gender-based violence across jurisdictions. The perpetrator, a Russian national residing in Ghana, secretly recorded intimate encounters with multiple women in Ghana and Kenya without their knowledge or consent. He then distributed the videos through a subscription-based Telegram channel, monetising the abuse and exploiting victims across national borders. Before authorities could apprehend him, he fled to Russia, placing him beyond the immediate reach of Ghanaian and Kenyan law enforcement. Despite efforts by both governments, including diplomatic engagement through the Russian embassies, he has not been extradited or prosecuted. The case demonstrated significant disparities in domestic legal responses. Under Kenya’s cybercrime legislation (Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes 2018 and amended in 2025) such conduct may attract a sentence of approximately two years’ imprisonment, whereas under Ghanaian law (Cybersecurity Act 2020) comparable offences may attract penalties of up to twenty-five years’ imprisonment. These differences illustrate the fragmented legal landscape across Africa and reinforce the need for greater harmonisation of legal standards and stronger regional cooperation.

The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol) defines violence against women broadly to include acts that cause or are likely to cause physical, sexual, psychological, or economic harm. This broad definition provides a legal basis for interpreting technology-facilitated gender-based violence within the existing regional human rights framework, even though the Protocol predates the rapid evolution of digital technologies and does not expressly refer to TFGBV or digital violence.

The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, through Resolution 522 (2022), explicitly called on States to expand the definition of gender-based violence to include digital violence, criminalise emerging forms of technology-facilitated abuse, strengthen reporting mechanisms, train law enforcement and judicial officers, improve data collection, and adopt survivor-centred approaches.

More recently, the African Union Convention on Ending Violence Against Women and Girls (AU CEVAWG) acknowledges that violence increasingly occurs in “cyberspace” and defines it as “means a digital medium of communication and interaction of global or interconnected systems.” However, its approach remains relatively narrow when viewed against the evolving international understanding of TFGBV. The Convention does not adopt the broader concept of TFGBV developed by international bodies such as UN Women (2024) and UNFPA. As a result, it does not fully capture the continuum of technology-facilitated abuse, including harms that are committed, assisted, aggravated, or amplified through technologies such as artificial intelligence, spyware, GPS tracking, algorithmic profiling, connected devices, and other emerging digital tools. As technology continues to evolve, African legal frameworks must also evolve to ensure that protection extends beyond traditional cyber offences and adequately addresses the full spectrum of TFGBV.

While Africa has made important normative progress, regional jurisprudence on technology-facilitated gender-based violence remains largely underdeveloped. Perhaps the most significant gap is the absence of regional jurisprudence. To date, neither the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights nor the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights or any African regional mechanism has issued a landmark decision that directly recognises or analyses technology-facilitated gender-based violence as a standalone human rights violation. Nor has either body, within the context of another case, expressly interpreted existing regional human rights guarantees through the lens of TFGBV. As a result, while domestic courts in some African countries are beginning to address these harms, the regional human rights system has yet to develop jurisprudence that clarifies States’ obligations in responding to technology-facilitated gender-based violence.

Laws, however, are only part of the solution. TFGBV thrives in silence. Reporting abuse, preserving digital evidence, supporting survivors, challenging harmful online behaviour, and advocating for stronger legal protections all contribute to safer digital spaces. Young people have enormous influence over the culture of the internet. Every respectful comment, every refusal to share harmful content, and every challenge to online abuse helps shape a safer digital environment.

Women and girls should never have to choose between their safety and their participation online. The solution is not to push women out of digital spaces. It is to ensure that governments, technology companies, institutions, and communities work together to make those spaces safe enough for everyone to participate freely, equally, and without fear.

About the author:

Abigail Nthuba is the Founder of the Gender Justice Advocacy and Litigation Centre in Botswana and a Waging Justice for Women (WJW) Fellow at the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA). She is an attorney and human rights advocate specialising in gender justice, strategic litigation and women’s rights, and is currently pursuing a PhD at the University of the Witwatersrand.