“Digital Colonialism”: U.S. Demands To Access Africans’ Data Raise Privacy, Sovereignty Concerns
POLITICSBy Sharon Lerner and Anna Maria Barry-Jester — Techdirt
Lusaka, Zambia – The Republic of Zambia finds itself at the forefront of a growing continental debate over digital sovereignty, as reports emerge detailing the United States' strategy of linking vital health assistance to unprecedented access to African nations' sensitive health data. This transactional approach, often termed "digital colonialism," has ignited concerns among policymakers and privacy advocates in Zambia, mirroring anxieties expressed across the continent regarding the potential exploitation of national resources – this time, in the form of personal information. The implications for Zambia, a nation that enacted a comprehensive Data Protection Act in 2021, are particularly pertinent, highlighting a delicate balance between accepting much-needed aid and safeguarding citizens' fundamental right to privacy. Recent revelations indicate that the US has been engaging various African countries, including Zambia, in bilateral agreements under its "America First Global Health Strategy." These agreements often stipulate broad access to health data systems, pathogen specimens, and even the integration of digital health infrastructure in exchange for billions of dollars in aid. While framed as efforts to enhance disease surveillance and health program evaluation, critics argue that the terms are often vague, lack sufficient safeguards for personal data, and disproportionately benefit the donor nation. Zambia's own Foreign Minister, Mulambo Haimbe, publicly acknowledged that proposed US health agreements contained data sharing terms that would violate Zambians' right to privacy, leading to requests for revisions. This stance underscores a national commitment to upholding the Data Protection Act of 2021, which mandates explicit consent for data processing, outlines data subjects' rights, and restricts the transfer of personal data outside the Republic. The broader context of these agreements suggests a strategic shift in US foreign policy, moving away from tradit