Perception of Pegasus in Rwanda: A Dive into Privacy Concerns

Nkurunziza Egide

doi:10.31149/ijhcs.v5i5.4564

Nkurunziza Egide Computer Intelligence Lab, UESTC, PRC

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31149/ijhcs.v5i5.4564

Keywords: Pegasus surveillance, National security, Individual privacy, Surveillance technologies

Abstract

This study explores the perceptions, fears, and nuanced opinions of Rwandans regarding the presence and potential misuse of Pegasus spyware, a globally controversial surveillance tool. Utilizing a mixed-method approach, we conducted a comprehensive survey involving 1,000 respondents, both within Rwanda and in diaspora, representing diverse age groups and genders. The research findings reveal a pervasive awareness of Pegasus among the respondents, with 80% expressing strong concerns about its potential misuse for surveillance. Moreover, a substantial 95% of respondents believe that the Rwandan government either currently uses or has previously employed Pegasus for surveillance purposes, while 70% assert that its deployment in Rwanda raises significant worries about privacy and individual rights. Notably, 80% of respondents associate the presence of Pegasus with a negative impact on freedom of speech and expression. Drawing from these findings, our study recommends a multifaceted approach, including stringent regulatory measures, technical safeguards, and an informed public discourse on surveillance technologies. It emphasizes the need for collaborative efforts involving governments, the private sector, and citizens to ensure the responsible and ethical deployment of surveillance tools like Pegasus, extending beyond Rwanda's borders to address global concerns. This research contributes to the ongoing global conversation about the delicate balance between national security imperatives and the preservation of individual privacy in the age of advancing digital surveillance technologies.

References

1. Abduvaliev, M., & Bustillo, R. (2020). Article patterns of official development assistance in tajikistan: Effects on growth and poverty reduction. Revista Brasileira de Politica Internacional, 63(2).
2. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
3. Creswell, J.W., & Creswell, J.D. (2017). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.
4. DiCicco‐Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B.F. (2006). The qualitative research interviews. Medical education, 40(4), 314-321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x
5. Field, A. (2013). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. Sage.
6. G2 (2023). Best Video Surveillance Software in 2023: Compare Reviews on 20+. Retrieved from G2
7. Getkisi (2019). The 10 Best Video Management Software (VMS) for 2019. Retrieved from Getkisi
8. Human Rights Watch (2018). Dark Side of Digital: Surveillance and Censorship. Retrieved from Human Rights Watch.
9. Human Rights Watch (2019). The Chilling Age of Surveillance: Privacy Implications of Pegasus. Retrieved from Human Rights Watch.
10. Human Rights Watch (2020). Digital Shadows: How Surveillance Shapes Lives. Retrieved from Human Rights Watch.
11. Human Rights Watch (2021). The Pegasus Equation: Balancing National Security and Individual Rights. Retrieved from Human Rights Watch.
12. Johnson, R.B., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014
13. Krueger, R.A., & Casey, M.A. (2014). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. Sage publications.