The article from Nation reveals how Kenyan police have been using mobile phone data to track and capture suspects, raising significant privacy and human rights concerns. The investigation highlights several key issues:
1. Unrestricted Access to Call Data: Kenyan security agencies have had almost unrestricted access to mobile phone users’ call data records (CDRs) and location data. This access has been facilitated by a data management system embedded within Safaricom’s internal systems by a British software company, Neural Technologies. This system allows real-time access to call data, ostensibly for tracking suspects.
2. Privacy Violations and Legal Concerns: The investigation raises concerns about the violation of privacy rights and the potential misuse of CDRs in abductions and extrajudicial killings. Although Safaricom claims to protect customer data and only release it with a court order, evidence suggests that police can obtain this data without formal processes.
3. Irregularities in Data Provided to Courts: The article details instances where Safaricom has provided incomplete or falsified CDRs in legal cases involving disappearances or murders, potentially impeding justice. This includes discrepancies in location data in cases like the disappearance of Trevor Ndwiga Nyaga and the abduction of South Sudanese activists Samuel Dong Luk and Idri Aggrey.
4. Use of Location Data for Targeting Operations: The investigation found that police and intelligence agencies have used mobile phone location data for operations that sometimes lead to abductions and killings without due judicial process. This includes the use of predictive profiling tools developed by Neural Technologies, which can map individuals’ movements and associations, raising further human rights concerns.
5. International Implications: The article also touches on the involvement of international entities like Vodafone, which holds a significant stake in Safaricom, and the role of British intelligence in supporting Kenyan operations. Despite these connections, there is no suggestion that these companies are complicit in human rights violations.