I bought my first M-net decoder in 1992 when my first born Mikaila was about a year old. The live broadcast was a Michael Jackson show from Romania.
Wednesday, 14 August 2024
Meeting Michael Jackson
Friday, 9 August 2024
Privacy Laws: Who Really Benefits?
Privacy laws are supposed to protect our personal information, but in reality, they often end up helping the rich more than the poor. This is especially true in countries like Namibia, where these laws can unintentionally create barriers that make it harder for poorer people to access opportunities for growth and development.
Privacy in Namibia
In Namibia, the Constitution protects your physical privacy, but protecting your personal data, like your name or address, needs specific laws. These include the Data Protection Act, Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations, and the Freedom of Access to Information Act. While these laws are important, they mostly benefit people who already have access to the internet and digital services. For those who are less fortunate, these laws can actually make life harder.
Information Access and Development
Being able to access information is key to development. Public places like libraries and telecentres provide access to information and technology for communities that don’t have it. But strict privacy laws can limit these centres’ ability to collect data that could help them improve their services. For example, if these centres could gather more detailed information about the people who use them, they could tailor their services to better meet community needs. However, privacy regulations often prevent this, making it harder to improve these services.
The Rich vs. The Poor
For wealthy people, privacy laws act as a shield, keeping their personal and business information safe. They have the money to protect their privacy, often using legal methods that the poor can’t afford. This creates an imbalance where the rich can live in a secure environment, while the poor remain vulnerable and are often excluded from services that require personal information.
The Costs of Privacy Laws
Setting up and enforcing privacy laws requires a lot of resources, which can be tough for developing countries like Namibia. For the poor, who might not even have basic access to technology, these laws don’t offer much benefit. Instead, they often add extra costs and complications that make it even harder for disadvantaged people to access services and opportunities.
Financial Barriers
Access to financial services is crucial for lifting people out of poverty. Credit bureaux, which collect and share credit information, are essential for helping people get loans. However, privacy laws can make it harder to set up these systems. In Namibia, many people who have never used banking services aren’t recorded in credit databases. This makes it difficult for banks to assess risk, leading to higher fees and interest rates for the poor, which keeps them stuck in poverty.
Finding a Balance
To make sure privacy laws don’t hurt development, it’s important to find a balance. Laws should protect people’s rights without blocking the benefits that come from using data. Namibia could create flexible privacy laws that allow responsible use of data in public services and financial systems, ensuring that everyone, not just the wealthy, can benefit from these protections.
Conclusion
Privacy laws are important for protecting personal information, but they must be designed in a way that doesn’t limit development opportunities for the poor. In Namibia, striking this balance is crucial. By making sure privacy laws are inclusive and don’t create additional barriers for the disadvantaged, the country can create an environment where both development and privacy are prioritized, benefiting everyone.
Friday, 2 August 2024
Milton Louw's stance on abortion
Milton Louw's writings do not extensively cover the topic of abortion, but given his emphasis on social justice, national development, and sustainable growth, a campaign stance on abortion would likely focus on balanced, compassionate approaches that respect individual rights and promote public health.
A possible approach for the campaign could be:
1. Healthcare Access and Education:
- Enhance comprehensive sexual education programs to reduce unwanted pregnancies.
- Improve access to healthcare services, including contraception and family planning resources.
2. Support Systems:
- Strengthen support for pregnant women, including prenatal care, financial assistance, and counseling services.
- Provide robust support for adoption services as an alternative to abortion.
3. Legal Framework:
- Engage in national dialogue to discuss the current legal status of abortion, considering public opinion and ethical perspectives.
- Ensure that any legislative changes are made transparently and democratically, prioritizing women's health and safety.
4. Public Health Perspective:
- Emphasize the importance of safe and legal abortion services to protect women's health.
- Combat unsafe abortion practices through stringent regulations and public awareness campaigns.
This balanced approach aligns with Milton Louw's vision for a progressive and inclusive Namibia, focusing on education, healthcare, and social support to address the complexities of the abortion issue.
Tuesday, 30 July 2024
Law Society of Namibia - Demand to desist from "unlawful acquisition and dissemination of private and confidential information"
For the regular readers of my blog you will recall my post Law Society of Namibia leaks members details - June 2023.
The Law Society of Namibia sent me a letter of demand to desist from unlawful acquisition and dissemination of private and confidential information of or relating to members of the Law Society of Namibia.
First let us look at the events that brought about this demand:
Thursday, 25 July 2024
Namibia's Universal Service Fund - better late than never
The Communications Regulatory Authority of Namibia (CRAN) advertised in daily newspapers for the position of Manager: Universal Fund on 25 July 2024. This has taken a long time (like many other issues at CRAN) but we hope that it will soon be operational.
If we look at the history of CRAN, there are numerous issues that should have been dealt with by the Authority but never have been operationalised. Let us look at these issues that impact the lives, and pockets, of Namibian consumers
Background
The Communications Act 8 of 2009 established the Communications Regulatory Authority of Namibia to provide for the regulation of telecommunications services and networks, broadcasting, postal services and the use and allocation of radio spectrum. In the law it provides for, amongst others, the following:
Universal Service Fund - benefiting the poor
Imagine living in a world without internet. No YouTube videos, no social media, no Netflix, and no way to easily do your homework or research. For many people, this is a reality.
A Universal Service Fund (USF) is like a special pot of money that governments use to make sure everyone, even people in really remote areas, can access the internet. It's like making sure everyone has a chance to use the same cool tools and information.
How does it work?
- Collecting money: Usually, internet service providers (like your phone company) pay a small amount extra on your bill. This money goes into the USF.
- Funding projects: The government uses this money to pay for things like:
- Building cell towers in rural areas
- Providing internet to schools and libraries
- Offering internet plans at lower prices for people who can't afford it
Why is it important?
- Education: Students can access online resources, do research, and learn new things.
- Jobs: People can find jobs, apply for them, and learn new skills online.
- Healthcare: Doctors can use the internet to access medical information and connect with other doctors.
- Communication: Families and friends can stay connected, no matter where they live.
In short, a Universal Service Fund helps to level the playing field, making sure everyone has a fair chance to benefit from the internet.
Under the Communications Act, a fund is to be established when the Act becomes operation - that is in 2009. It is not clear what prevented the establishment of the fund and the levies, but the monopoly cellular company, MTC, took CRAN to court in 2020 when they lodged a constitutional challenge against Section 23 of the Communications Act, contending that the amendment granting CRAN the authority to impose regulatory levies failed to establish limits on levy amounts, lacked executive oversight, and granted CRAN unchecked discretion. "On 13 March 2024, the Supreme Court delivered its verdict, overturning the previous ruling and affirming the constitutionality of the amended Section 23. The Court underscored the legislature’s efforts to provide detailed guidelines, thereby curbing CRAN’s discretionary powers and ensuring a balanced approach to levy imposition.
In a media statement following the judgment, the Supreme Court praised the amended legislative framework for establishing clear criteria for levy determination and implementing safeguards against arbitrary decision-making by CRAN. The ruling provides stability to CRAN’s funding structure and paves the way for the implementation of the Universal Service Fund, a crucial initiative stalled by the legal dispute."1
I hope that this latest advertisement it means that CRAN is at last starting to do its job as provided for in 2009.