The Platform Question: Power, Accountability and Global South In the case of Uganda, the tension between platforms and the state has long existed. In July 2018, telecom companies in Uganda blocked access to social media platforms for all users and required them to pay a newly introduced Over-TheTop” (OTT) tax before regaining access (Nanfuka, 2018). The tax was the result of a March 2018 presidential directive for social media to be taxed to raise resources “to cope with the consequences” of social media users’ “opinions, prejudices [and] insults” (2018). It was at this time that social media platforms were framed as a place of “gossip” despite the government having set up frameworks for various Ministries, Departments and Agencies to utilize social media platforms as avenues for civic engagement. Uganda has had a practice of blocking social media platforms during elections, as was the case in the 2016 election and the in the 2021 elections. However, the latter election served as the tipping point between the state and platforms. 138 Uganda has had a practice of blocking social media platforms during elections, as was the case in the 2016 election and the in the 2021 elections. However, the latter election served as the tipping point between the state and platforms. In three days before the January 14, 2021, Facebook suspended the accounts of various government officials associated with the ruling party for what the platform described as “Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour” which was aimed at manipulating public online debate. X (Twitter at the time) also suspended similar accounts. Facebook removed 220 personal accounts, thirty-two pages, fifty-nine groups and 139 Instagram accounts which according to the platforms had links with the media arm of the government – the Government Citizens Interaction Center (DFR Lab, 2021). The government perceived the take-downs of accounts associated with the ruling party (the National Resistance Movement – NRM) as an attempt at meddling with national interests. This sparked a debate on who has the authority to curate online content, especially where government content and actors are involved. Don Wanyama (whose Facebook and Instagram accounts were also suspended), the President Museveni’s press secretary, accused the platforms of trying to influence the elections and stated, “Shame on the foreign powers who think they can impose a puppet government on Uganda by disabling the online accounts of NRM supporters” (Fröhlich, 2022). Wanyama’s account was among those that shared anti-opposition narrative. The government would go on to respond by blocking access Democracy Caught in A Power Struggle Between Platforms and Politics The Platform Question: Power, Accountability and Global South to social media platforms 48 hours before polling opened, and eventually a complete internet access block was be initiated. The election was conducted in a complete internet blackout. Internet access would start its journey back to restoration on January 18, 2021. All social media sites would be made accessible, except Facebook. As the country prepares for elections in January 2026, Facebook has remained inaccessible, unless through the use of a Virtual Private Network (VPN). The election will see the incumbent Museveni run for another term in office to add to his 40 year tenure in office. Meanwhile, a month earlier, in December 2020 the Uganda government through the telecommunications regulator sent a letter to Alphabet (Google’s holding company) in which it requested that YouTube blocks over 14 YouTube channels. The channels were primarily channels associated with the opposition as well as those of citizen journalists that had largely been publishing or live-streaming content from opposition party leader and presidential candidate Robert Kyagulanyi’s (also known as Bobi Wine) campaign trail. In several instances, the campaign had turned violent with police cracking down on opposition supporters. The UCC argued that the channels violated Ugandan laws and that the continued broadcast by the channels might cause economic sabotage and compromise Uganda’s national security (The Independent, 2020). The request was not accepted by Google LLC who noted that for YouTube channels to be removed, the government would have had to submit a court order. In the case of Uganda, there was a hyperfocus on disinformation by the ruling party and its associates, despite disinformation also being driven by opposition actors (Code For Africa, 2021). What is emerging is a pattern of internet shutdowns where there is a complex tug of war between states and digital platforms. These power dynamics illustrate that the convergence of sovereignty, political control especially in authoritarian regimes, and platforms is increasingly resulting in conflicts. States implementing disruptions are increasingly intersecting with the role of tech platforms as arbiters of online discourse who some states are arguing are skewing information controls and dissemination. While platforms can act as a force of democracy by facilitating access to information and enhancing government What is emerging is a pattern of internet shutdowns where there is a complex tug of war between states and digital platforms. These power dynamics illustrate that the convergence of sovereignty, political control especially in authoritarian regimes, and platforms is increasingly resulting in conflicts. Democracy Caught in A Power Struggle Between Platforms and Politics 139