Invasive AI — led Mass Surveillance in Africa Raises Privacy Concerns, Warn Experts. City, Country — The rapid expansion of AI-powered mass-surveillance systems across Africa is violating citizens’right to privacy and having a chilling effect on society, according to experts on human rights and emerging technologies. At least $2bn (£1.
5bn) has been spent by 11 African governments on Chinese-built surveillance technology that recognizes faces and monitors movements, according to a new report by the Institute of Development Studies.
The report, co — authored by the African Digital Rights Network, warns that national security is being used to justify implementing these systems with little regulation. Chinese companies often sell the technology in packages that include CCTV systems, facial recognition, biometric data collection, and cameras that track vehicle movements, presenting it as a tool to help rapidly urbanizing countries modernize their cities and reduce crime.
However, researchers from the African Digital Rights Network say there is no real evidence of these systems reducing crime and warn that they allow governments to monitor human rights activists and political opponents, arrest protesters, and lead journalists to self — censor. Wairagala Wakabi, executive director of the Kampala-based policy body Cipesa and co-author of the report, said: “This large-scale and invasive AI-enabled surveillance of public spaces is not ‘legal, necessary or proportionate’ to the legitimate aim of providing security. History shows us that this is the latest tool used by governments to invade the privacy of citizens and stifle freedom of movement and expression.
” Nigeria has spent the most on infrastructure, investing $470m on 10,000 smart cameras by last year. Egypt has installed 6,000, while Algeria and Uganda have about 5,000 each.
An average of $240m was spent by the 11 countries, with the investment often funded by loans from Chinese banks.
The report emphasizes that a lack of regulation or legal framework on storing and using the data on individuals is a concern, given the rapid rollout of this technology. Bulelani Jili, an assistant professor at Georgetown University, said even the introduction of laws could be dangerous, as surveillance of online activity has often been used to crack down on dissent and has been legalised through laws that can criminalise ordinary people for their posts online. Jili said focusing on the introduction of laws could simply allow governments to claim the systems had been legitimised.
“The real challenge, therefore, is not simply whether surveillance is regulated, but how societies negotiate the balance between security, accountability, and civil liberties once these technologies become deeply institutionalised,” he. Further details are expected as the situation unfolds.
