Partly Free
60
/ 100
| A Obstacles to Access | 12 / 25 |
| B Limits on Content | 29 / 35 |
| C Violations of User Rights | 19 / 40 |
Last Year's Score & Status
59 / 100 Partly Free
Scores are based on a scale of 0 (least free) to 100 (most free). See the methodology and report acknowledgements.
Internet freedom in Angola improved slightly during the coverage period. However, the legislature passed new laws that restricted digital rights, and although a social media influencer and a digital journalist were released from prison, other prosecutions for online activities continued.
- In August 2024, President João Lourenço signed the National Security Law, which would allow the government to interfere with the media and restrict telecommunications services—including internet services—without court approval in unspecified “exceptional circumstances.” It also granted additional surveillance powers to the authorities (A3 and C5).1
- President Lourenço signed a second piece of legislation, the Law on Crimes of Vandalism of Public Goods and Services, on the same day in August 2024. Among other provisions, the law prescribed up to 15 years’ imprisonment for providing, disseminating, or publishing—including through digital media—information related to security measures for public goods and services (B8 and C2).2
- The president pardoned social media influencer Ana da Silva Miguel, known online as Neth Nahara, in December 2024 and news site editor Carlos Alberto in April 2025.3 They had been convicted for allegedly insulting state officials. Despite these pardons, other criminal cases related to online speech continued to proceed. Daniel Frederico Pensador, editor of the news portal Repórter Angola, was convicted on defamation charges and sentenced to three years in prison in November 2024; he had been detained and charged in 2023 in connection with an article published the year before by another news site (C3).4
Angola has been ruled by the same party since independence, and authorities have systematically repressed political dissent. Corruption, due process violations, and abuses by security forces remain common. Some restrictions on the press and civil society were eased after President Lourenço took office in 2017, but that partial opening has since been reversed.
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.
A1 0-6 pts
| Do infrastructural limitations restrict access to the internet or the speed and quality of internet connections? | 2 / 6 |
A2 0-3 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 / 3 |
A3 0-6 pts
| Does the government exercise technical or legal control over internet infrastructure for the purposes of restricting connectivity? | 5 / 6 |
A4 0-6 pts
| Are there legal, regulatory, or economic obstacles that restrict the diversity of service providers? | 3 / 6 |
A5 0-4 pts
| Do national regulatory bodies that oversee service providers and digital technology fail to operate in a free, fair, and independent manner? | 1 / 4 |
B1 0-6 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 / 6 |
B2 0-4 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? | 3 / 4 |
B3 0-4 pts
| Do restrictions on the internet and digital content lack transparency, proportionality to the stated aims, or an independent appeals process? | 4 / 4 |
B4 0-4 pts
| Do online journalists, commentators, and ordinary users practice self-censorship? | 3 / 4 |
B5 0-4 pts
| Are online sources of information controlled or manipulated by the government or other powerful actors to advance a particular political interest? | 3 / 4 |
Score Change: The score improved from 2 to 3 because there were no new reports of online influence operations by the government or the ruling party during the coverage period.
B6 0-3 pts
| Are there economic or regulatory constraints that negatively affect users’ ability to publish content online? | 2 / 3 |
B7 0-4 pts
| Does the online information landscape lack diversity and reliability? | 3 / 4 |
B8 0-6 pts
| Do conditions impede users’ ability to mobilize, form communities, and campaign, particularly on political and social issues? | 5 / 6 |
C1 0-6 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? | 2 / 6 |
C2 0-4 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 / 4 |
C3 0-6 pts
| Are individuals penalized for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? | 3 / 6 |
C4 0-4 pts
| Does the government place restrictions on anonymous communication or encryption? | 3 / 4 |
C5 0-6 pts
| Does state surveillance of internet activities infringe on users’ right to privacy? | 2 / 6 |
C6 0-6 pts
| Does monitoring and collection of user data by service providers and other technology companies infringe on users’ right to privacy? | 3 / 6 |
C7 0-5 pts
| Are individuals subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor in relation to their online activities? | 3 / 5 |
C8 0-3 pts
| Are websites, governmental and private entities, service providers, or individual users subject to widespread hacking and other forms of cyberattack? | 2 / 3 |
Footnotes
- 1CIVICUS, “Repressive New Laws Threaten Civic Space,” September 15, 2024, https://monitor.civicus.org/explore/repressive-new-laws-threaten-civic-…; Human Rights Watch, “Angola: President Signs Laws Curtailing Speech, Association,” September 10, 2024, https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/10/angola-president-signs-laws-curtail….
- 2Human Rights Watch, “Angola: President Signs Laws Curtailing Speech, Association,” September 10, 2024, https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/10/angola-president-signs-laws-curtail….
- 3Amnesty International, “Angola: Five government critics released after more than a year of arbitrary imprisonment,” January 07, 2025, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/01/angola-five-government-c…; “Jornalista Carlos Alberto recebe indulto do Presidente [Journalist Carlos Alberto Receives Pardon from the President],” April 11, 2025, Deutsche Welle, https://www.dw.com/pt-002/jornalista-carlos-alberto-recebe-indulto-do-p….
- 4“Jornalista angolano condenado três anos de prisão [Angolan Journalist Sentenced to Three Years in Prison],” November 13, 2024, Club-K, https://www.club-k.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=556…; “Jornalista Angolano condenado a três anos de prisão: Entenda o caso [Angolan Journalist Sentenced to Three Years in Prison: Understand the Case],” November 18, 2024, Diário Independente, https://diarioindependente.info/2024/11/18/jornalista-angolano-condenad….
