STAY UP TO DATE: The Effects of the US Foreign Aid Freeze on Freedom House
Expanding Freedom and Democracy
Freedom on the Net 2025

Rwanda

Not Free
34
100
A Obstacles to Access 13 25
B Limits on Content 11 35
C Violations of User Rights 10 40
Last Year's Score & Status
36 100 Not Free
Scores are based on a scale of 0 (least free) to 100 (most free). See the methodology and report acknowledgements.
Rwanda_hero_map

header1 Key Developments, June 1, 2024 – May 31, 2025

Internet freedom declined in Rwanda during the coverage period. Progovernment trolls used harassment and manipulated content in an effort to drown out any online criticism of the government ahead of the country’s tightly controlled general elections in July 2024, and these practices persisted long after the balloting. Self-censorship remained rampant, as the government continued to imprison people who criticized it online. Users serving lengthy sentences were at risk of torture, ill-treatment, or forced disappearance.

  • Ahead of the July 2024 general elections, social media accounts circulated synthetic or manipulated content designed to advance progovernment narratives and undermine critics of the regime.1 When Rwanda cut diplomatic ties with Belgium in March 2025, Rwandan accounts on the social media platform X, showing signs of coordinated inauthentic behavior, began to harass Belgian officials using strategies similar to those deployed by a network of accounts identified in the run-up to the elections (B5).2
  • In June 2024, the wife of a video blogger active on the YouTube platform was sentenced to 10 years in prison on charges including complicity in genocide denial, trivializing the country’s 1994 genocide, and complicity in inciting public unrest. Her husband, who had fled the country, had frequently shared controversial narratives about the ruling party’s role in the genocide; he was sentenced in absentia to 15 years in prison for genocide denial.3 Another YouTube user was sentenced to seven years in prison in October 2024 on charges of genocide denial, inciting division, and spreading false information (C3).4
  • In August 2024, the Rwanda Utilities Regulatory Authority released new regulations for SIM-card registration. They required users to undergo biometric verification upon registering, and mobile service providers would be obliged to retain registration data for 10 years (C4).5

header2 Political Overview

The Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), led by President Paul Kagame, has ruled the country since it ousted forces responsible for the 1994 genocide, ending the civil war that began in 1990. While the regime has maintained stability and economic growth, the government continues to suppress political dissent through pervasive surveillance, intimidation, arbitrary detention, torture, and renditions or suspected assassinations of exiled dissidents.

This report has been abridged for Freedom on the Net 2025 due to ongoing budget constraints. Please consider making a donation to support future editions of this vital resource.

For additional background information, see last year’s full report.

A Obstacles to Access

A1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do infrastructural limitations restrict access to the internet or the speed and quality of internet connections? 3.003 6.006
A2 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Is access to the internet prohibitively expensive or beyond the reach of certain segments of the population for geographical, social, or other reasons? 1.001 3.003
A3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the government exercise technical or legal control over internet infrastructure for the purposes of restricting connectivity? 5.005 6.006
A4 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are there legal, regulatory, or economic obstacles that restrict the diversity of service providers? 3.003 6.006
A5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do national regulatory bodies that oversee service providers and digital technology fail to operate in a free, fair, and independent manner? 1.001 4.004

B Limits on Content

B1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the state block or filter, or compel service providers to block or filter, internet content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 3.003 6.006
B2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do state or nonstate actors employ legal, administrative, or other means to force publishers, content hosts, or digital platforms to delete content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 2.002 4.004
B3 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do restrictions on the internet and digital content lack transparency, proportionality to the stated aims, or an independent appeals process? 1.001 4.004
B4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do online journalists, commentators, and ordinary users practice self-censorship? 0.000 4.004
B5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are online sources of information controlled or manipulated by the government or other powerful actors to advance a particular political interest? 1.001 4.004
B6 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are there economic or regulatory constraints that negatively affect users’ ability to publish content online? 1.001 3.003
B7 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the online information landscape lack diversity and reliability? 1.001 4.004
B8 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do conditions impede users’ ability to mobilize, form communities, and campaign, particularly on political and social issues? 2.002 6.006

C Violations of User Rights

C1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do the constitution or other laws fail to protect rights such as freedom of expression, access to information, and press freedom, including on the internet, and are they enforced by a judiciary that lacks independence? 1.001 6.006
C2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are there laws that assign criminal penalties or civil liability for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 1.001 4.004
C3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are individuals penalized for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 1.001 6.006

Score Change: The score declined from 2 to 1 because internet users received lengthy prison sentences for their online activity during the coverage period.

C4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the government place restrictions on anonymous communication or encryption? 2.002 4.004

Score Change: The score declined from 3 to 2 because new regulations required users of mobile devices to undergo biometric verification when registering a SIM card.

C5 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does state surveillance of internet activities infringe on users’ right to privacy? 1.001 6.006
C6 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does monitoring and collection of user data by service providers and other technology companies infringe on users’ right to privacy? 1.001 6.006
C7 1.00-5.00 pts0-5 pts
Are individuals subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor in relation to their online activities? 1.001 5.005
C8 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are websites, governmental and private entities, service providers, or individual users subject to widespread hacking and other forms of cyberattack? 2.002 3.003

On Rwanda

See all data, scores & information on this country or territory.

See More

Country Facts

  • Population

    13,780,000

  • Global Freedom Score

    21 100 not free

  • Internet Freedom Score

    34 100 not free

  • Freedom in the World Status

    Not Free

  • Networks Restricted

    No

  • Websites Blocked

    Yes

  • Pro-government Commentators

    Yes

  • Users Arrested

    Yes