South Africa
Free
75
100
| A Obstacles to Access | 19 25 |
| B Limits on Content | 29 35 |
| C Violations of User Rights | 27 40 |
Last Year's Score & Status
73
100
Free
Scores are based on a scale of 0 (least free) to 100 (most free).
See the methodology and report acknowledgements.
Protections for digital rights are robust in South Africa, and internet freedom improved during the coverage period. The prevalence of online content manipulation lessened in South Africa, and fewer individuals faced criminal charges for their online posts. The government continued its efforts to address weaknesses in the electrical grid that have posed a challenge to internet access in recent years. Concerns over government surveillance persist, however, and women and individuals belonging to certain minority groups continue to face disproportionate levels of online intimidation and harassment.
This report has been abridged for Freedom on the Net 2026. Please consider making a donation to support future editions of this vital resource. For additional information, see the 2024 full report and 2025 abridged report.
A1
1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
| Do infrastructural limitations restrict access to the internet or the speed and quality of internet connections? | 5.005 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? | 2.002 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? | 6.006 6.006 |
A4
1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
| Are there legal, regulatory, or economic obstacles that restrict the diversity of service providers? | 4.004 6.006 |
A5
1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
| Do national regulatory bodies that oversee service providers, digital platforms, and the internet more broadly fail to operate in a free, fair, and independent manner? | 2.002 4.004 |
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? | 6.006 6.006 |
B2
1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
| Do state or nonstate actors employ legal, administrative, or other means to force publishers, digital platforms, content hosts, or other intermediaries to delete content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? | 3.003 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? | 3.003 4.004 |
B4
1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
| Do journalists, commentators, and ordinary people practice self-censorship online? | 3.003 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 favored interest? | 3.003 4.004 |
Score Change: The score improved from 2 to 3 because the level of content manipulation observed during the May 2024 electoral cycle was not repeated during the coverage period, although disinformation continues to be a cause for concern in the digital sphere.1
- 1“Beware deepfake: Video of South Africa’s anti-migrant group leader saying her parents are Zimbabwean,” Africa Check, November 27, 2025, https://africacheck.org/fact-checks/meta-programme-fact-checks/beware-d…; Victoria O’Regan, “IEC to tackle AI fakes and social media scams ahead of local elections,” Daily Maverick, March 10, 2026, https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2026-03-10-iec-to-tackle-ai-fak….
B6
1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
| Are there economic, regulatory, or other constraints that negatively affect individuals’ ability to publish content online? | 2.002 3.003 |
B7
1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
| Does the online information landscape lack diversity and reliability? | 3.003 4.004 |
B8
1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
| Do conditions impede individuals’ ability to form communities, mobilize, and campaign online, particularly on political and social issues? | 6.006 6.006 |
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? | 5.005 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? | 2.002 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? | 6.006 6.006 |
Score Change: The score improved from 5 to 6 because fewer individuals have been penalized for legitimate online activities in recent years.
C4
1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
| Does the government place restrictions on anonymous online communication or encryption? | 3.003 4.004 |
C5
1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
| Does state surveillance of internet activities infringe on individuals’ right to privacy? | 2.002 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 individuals’ right to privacy? | 3.003 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? | 4.004 5.005 |
C8
1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
| Are websites, governmental and private entities, service providers, or individuals subject to widespread hacking and other forms of cyberattack? | 2.002 3.003 |
Country Facts
-
Population
59,890,000 -
Global Freedom Score
81 100 free -
Internet Freedom Score
75 100 free -
Freedom in the World Status
Free
