Addressing South Africa's digital blind spot: Protecting children's rights in the digital age
Image: Supplied.
Dr Bridget J Machaka
In South Africa, a new generation of children is growing up in a world where the digital and physical are inseparable. From smartphones in their pockets to online classrooms, social media, and biometric data collection at school gates, children's lives are increasingly shaped by technology. Yet our laws and policies are glaringly out of sync with this reality, a dangerous oversight that puts their safety, privacy, and access to education at risk.
The digital world
The digital revolution is not on the horizon, it is here. Globally, internet usage has surged past five billion people. In Africa, over 590 million people are online, and children make up nearly a third of all internet users. South Africa mirrors this trend, with growing access to smartphones and online platforms reshaping childhood experiences. The digital world is no longer a privilege or a pastime. It is the new public square and playground for children.
Globally, children's rights frameworks have tried to catch up. The United Nations(UN) Committee on the Rights of the Child's General Comment No. 25 (2021) made it explicit: children's rights apply online just as they do offline. The African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child echoed this on the Day of the African Child (DAC) 2023 themed "The Rights of the Child in the Digital Environment'.
The Committee affirmed that the digital space is not exempt from the protections children are entitled to under the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. But has South Africa kept pace with this shift? Yes, our Constitution, and the Children's Act 38 of 2005 guarantee every child's right to protection and echo the core principles underpinning all children's rights: non-discrimination, the best interests of the child, survival and development, and child participation. These principles should guide all measures aimed at realising children's rights in the digital environment.
Yet, in practice, these protections remain more theoretical than tangible in the digital sphere. South Africa's cornerstone privacy law, the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA), was a step in the right direction, introducing some protections for data. However, POPIA is not a child-centric law. It lacks the tailored protections, enforcement mechanisms, and accountability structures required to protect children in a rapidly evolving digital age.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Regulation
It does not require platforms, schools, or service providers to assess how their digital systems affect children. Nor does it regulate how educational or health institutions collect, process, or store children's data. And when it comes to enforcement? Sporadic at best. Reports by Media Monitoring Africa have consistently shown how children remain exposed to harmful content on social media platforms, largely due to insufficient regulatory oversight. These reports also highlight how social media outlets continue disregard ethical standards by revealing the identities of child victims, suspects, or witnesses incases of abuse or crime. This reflects a broader systemic issue: the lack of proactive and child-centered enforcement of digital rights protections.
The consequences are playing out in real time. Schools are collecting children's biometric data fingerprints, facial recognition, and learning analytics, often without meaningful parental consent or adequate protections. Learning platforms store sensitive information with minimal oversight. Such unchecked data practices not only breach privacy but risk normalising surveillance cultures in children's formative spaces. Unlike countries such as the United Kingdom, which adopted the Age-Appropriate Design Code to ensure digital services process children's data responsibly, South Africa has no binding standards tailored to the digital protection of children. As a result, children's digital lives are being mined, monitored, and monetised with few protections in place.
Cybersecurity
South Africa also lacks meaningful capacity-building incentives and strategies in cybersecurity essential for bridging the digital divide, building institutional competence, and addressing skills shortages and policy gaps. The absence of child-specific digital legislation, coupled with limited awareness among policymakers, continues to leave children's rights online dangerously under-prioritised.
And it's not just about data and privacy, deeper systematic issues are emerging. Digital systems meant to make education more efficient are systematically excluding some of the most vulnerable children. For instance, a significant barrier arises from online application portals for school admissions being implemented in provinces such as Gauteng and the Western Cape. The experience of children being denied access to schools due to the use of online portals highlights the broader legal deficiency in South Africa's digital school environment.
In a joint submission to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, SECTION27 and others highlighted that some parents have indicated the impossibility of completing the online admission process without an identity number. These online portals provide no guidance for applicants without identity documents, leaving them with no clear alternative means of applying. The parents further revealed that even when they visit schools in person they are often turned away by principals, who insists that admissions are processed exclusively through online applications.
In the 2021 case of Equal Education v Minister of Basic Education, the court highlighted the ongoing and systematic exclusion of vulnerable children from schools, expressing serious concerns about how this exclusion continues in the emerging digital environment. Meanwhile, a darker side of the digital world is also emerging unchecked. Cyberbullying, online harassment, sextortion, and revenge porn are no longer fringe threats. They are everyday risks for South African children generally. Although, the Cybercrimes Act 19 of 2020 criminalises some of this behaviour, South Africa education system still lacks a standardised national policy on information and communication technology and cyber-safety. Teachers aren't trained. Law enforcement often lacks the tools or skills to help. In the vacuum, toxic cybercultures thrive and undermine children's mental health and safety.
Child protection
The message is clear: South Africa needs more than updated laws. We need a complete rethink of how we protect children (and their rights) in a digital age. What needs to happen? First, digital systems for education, health, and social services must stop being tools of exclusion. Where systems fail, inclusive alternatives, even manual options, must be available. Second, the enforcement of POPIA must be ramped up, especially in sectors dealing with children. Data collection should only happen with informed consent, clear safeguards, and accountability.
The Information Regulator must take a proactive role, not just react when things go wrong. Third, child rights impact assessments must be mandatory before launching any digital service aimed at or used by children. Whether it's an EdTech platform, a school app, or a government portal, children's rights must be built in, not bolted on. Fourth, schools need enforceable cyber safety policies, backed by training for teachers, parents, and children alike.
Digital literacy
Digital literacy shouldn't be a nice-to-have. It should be part of every school's core curriculum. The oversight bodies like the Human Rights Commission and the Information Regulator must be properly mandated and resourced to protect children's digital rights effectively. We are standing at a crossroads. The digital world holds incredible promise for education, connection, and empowerment. But without a rights-based approach, it also risks deepening inequality, fueling harm, and widening the very gaps we are trying to close. South Africa must act with urgency and intention. Without decisive, child-centred digital intervention, we risk leaving another generation behind.
*Machaka is a postdoctoral research fellow in the Department of Private Law at Stellenbosch University.
Weekend Argus
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
eNCA
2 hours ago
- eNCA
Bangladesh protest victim gives evidence at ex-PM trial
DHAKA - The first witness in the trial of Bangladesh's fugitive ex-prime minister Sheikh Hasina gave evidence on Sunday, a man shot in the face during protests that toppled her last year. Hasina, 77, who has defied court orders to return from India to attend her trial on charges amounting to crimes against humanity, is accused of ordering a deadly crackdown in a failed bid to crush the student-led uprising. Up to 1,400 people were killed between July and August 2024, according to the United Nations. The first witness, among the 11 cases that the prosecution is expected to present to the court, was Khokon Chandra Barman, whose story reflects the violence of the protests. The 23-year-old wears a mask to conceal his face, which was ripped apart by gunshot during the culmination of the protests on 5 August, 2024, the same day that Hasina fled Dhaka by helicopter. "I want justice for the ordeal I've been going through, and for my fellow protesters who sacrificed their lives," he told the court. Barman lost his left eye, while his right eye was damaged, as well as his lips, nose and teeth. A video showing Barman's blood-covered face was played in court, with the opening statements aired on the state-run broadcaster. Prosecutors have filed five charges against Hasina -- including failure to prevent mass murder -- which amount to crimes against humanity under Bangladeshi law. "Sheikh Hasina was the nucleus around whom all the crimes committed during the July–August uprising revolved," chief prosecutor Tajul Islam told the court on Sunday. Hasina is on trial in absentia alongside two other accused. One, her former interior minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal, is also a fugitive. The other, Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun, the former inspector general of police, is in custody. He has pleaded guilty. Attorney General Md Asaduzzaman said he wanted a "fair trial", speaking to reporters outside the court. "People were killed and maimed -- we demand the highest punishment for the crimes committed," Asaduzzaman said. Amir Hossain, the state-appointed lawyer for Hasina, noted that Barman was shot during the chaotic final day of the weeks-long protests. He pointed out that several police officers were also killed in clashes with protesters and it was "unclear who actually shot Barman". Hossain said he was not in contact with Hasina, who has refused to accept the authority of the court. The trial continues.
IOL News
5 hours ago
- IOL News
Mass abduction in Nigeria as armed 'bandits' kidnap over 50 people
Gangs preying on rural communities that have long had little or no government presence. Image: Kola Sulaimon / AFP Gunmen kidnapped more than 50 people in northwest Nigeria in a mass abduction, according to a private conflict monitoring report created for the United Nations and seen by AFP on Sunday. "Armed bandits" targeted the village of Sabon Garin Damri in Zamfara state Friday, the report said, the latest attack in a region where residents in rural hinterlands have long suffered from gangs who kidnap for ransom, loot villages and demand taxes. The report said this was the first "mass capture" incident in the Bakura local government area this year, "the recent trend of mass captures in Zamfara has been concerning," noting "a shift in bandit strategy toward more large-scale attacks in northern Zamfara." A Zamfara police spokesman did not respond to a request for comment. Nigeria's "banditry" crisis originated in conflict over land and water rights between herders and farmers but has morphed into organised crime, with gangs preying on rural communities that have long had little or no government presence. The conflict is worsening a malnutrition crisis in the northwest as attacks drive people away from their farms, in a situation that has been complicated by climate change and western aid cuts. Last month, bandits in Zamfara killed 33 people they had kidnapped in February despite receiving a $33,700 (R594,000) ransom, while three babies died in captivity, officials and residents told AFP. Bandit-jihadist cooperation Since 2011, as arms trafficking increased and the wider Sahel fell into turmoil, organised armed gangs formed in northwest Nigeria, with cattle rustling and kidnapping becoming huge moneymakers in the largely impoverished countryside. Groups also levy taxes on farmers and artisanal miners. Violence has spread in recent years from the northwest into north-central Nigeria. Two weeks ago, Nigerian troops killed at least 95 members of an armed gang in a shootout and airstrikes in the northwest state of Niger. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad Loading But the military is overstretched. While improved cooperation between the army and air force has aided the fight, analysts say, airstrikes have also killed hundreds of civilians over the years. Bandits, who are primarily motivated by money, have also increased their cooperation with Nigeria's jihadist groups, who are waging a separate, 16-year-old armed insurrection in the northeast. The recent emergence of the Lakurawa jihadist group in the northwest has worsened violence in the region. Governments of affected states have been forced to recruit anti-jihadist militias fighting the militants in the northeast to assist in countering the bandits. AFP
IOL News
6 hours ago
- IOL News
Constitutional Court finds Parliament failed in public participation process
The Constitutional Court overturned the appointment of the new members of the Commission for Gender Equality, saying the process lacked reasonable public participation. Image: Kamogelo Moichela The Constitutional Court, in an unanimous judgment, found that Parliament failed to comply with its constitutional obligation to facilitate a reasonable public participation process in the appointment of new members for the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE). Corruption Watch, which launched this application, submitted that the public participation process was defective due to insufficient information on the shortlisted candidates being made publicly available. Furthermore, they submitted that the opportunity for public participation was restricted to 2,000 character submissions and only 14 days were provided for written submissions. Corruption Watch contended that the opportunity for public participation was unreasonable and inadequate. It also argued that the Portfolio Committee misinterpreted the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA), leading to unnecessary restrictions on candidate information. In doing so, the Portfolio Committee wrongly concluded that POPIA permits only the sharing of minimal information, it said. The Speaker, on behalf of the National Assembly, submitted that the opportunity it provided for public participation in the recommendation process was reasonable and defended the 14-day period as sufficient, citing past appointment processes. The Speaker also submitted that the Portfolio Committee properly considered all public comments before making recommendations and that withholding full CVs of the shortlisted candidates was in line with POPIA, as consent was required before publicly sharing candidates' personal information. The Information Regulator submitted in an explanatory affidavit that consent is not required if the processing of that information is necessary for public duties. It supported Corruption Watch in stating that POPIA does not prevent the Portfolio Committee from fulfilling its constitutional mandate to ensure public involvement in legislative and 'other processes'. Media Monitoring Africa, which joined the proceedings as a friend of the court, submitted that effective media reporting is crucial for transparency and public engagement and also contended that the Portfolio Committee's failure to publish candidates' CVs hindered the media's ability to act as a watchdog, restricting the public's right to access information and meaningfully participate in the appointment process. The court held that the mechanisms adopted by the Portfolio Committee to facilitate public involvement in the appointment of commissioners to the CGE failed to allow for effective public participation. It said that while a court must take due cognisance of what the National Assembly chooses to do to facilitate public involvement, the assessment of what was done is an objective one. In this instance, the National Assembly acted upon an interpretation of POPIA which was manifestly incorrect, rendering the conduct unreasonable. This, coupled with the short period allowed for public comments and the restriction on such comments, materially affected the appointment process as a whole. In the circumstances, the appointment process conducted by the National Assembly did not comply with the obligations imposed by the Constitution and is therefore invalid, the court found.
