"Governments have updated penal codes and national security laws, enacted fake news and cybersecurity laws as well as laws that govern internet service providers and technology companies. These laws have widely been used to block and remove online content that call out blind spots in government policies and to intimidate and prosecute these content creators through hefty fines and jail time. Efforts to hold political office holders and government officials accountable for their policies are increasingly penalised. These government actions have significantly impacted civil society actors in numerous ways. First, individuals and organisations utilising the online sphere to hold government officials and policies accountable have come under intense scrutiny, resulting in the criminalisation of critics and the blocking and removal of online content deemed sensitive by state authorities. Second, the effectiveness of civil society in holding governments accountable is compromised, as state authorities routinely direct internet service providers and technology companies to block or remove online content considered sensitive or illegal. Consequently, individuals and organisations increasingly find their digital content at risk of being blocked or removed, succumbing to government directives to internet service providers and technology companies. This diminishes civil society’s calls for accountability. Third, on several instances, governments have imposed internet shutdowns - particularly during elections and politically sensitive periods - to disrupt the information flow. Ultimately, this has limited civil society’s ability to send and receive communications effectively to mobilise people to hold governments publicly accountable during politically important instances. Fourth, troll ng has surfaced as a mainstream strategy to harass and intimidate individuals and organisations who seek to hold governments accountable. Typically orchestrated by organised groups or cybertroopers, these digital attacks increasingly involve online hate speech directed at women who call out blindspots in government policies. Fifth, the ways of working of INGOs and CSOs have changed, leading many organisations to restrict the scope and assertiveness of their communications to shield themselves from government retribution and trolling. Some entities have opted to remove the visibility of their organisations, incorporating measures such as disallowing the use of their logos or the publishing of videos, photos and text by local partners in order to distance themselves from particular activities and contents of knowledge products. Given these developments, the principal recommendation is that key stakeholders, including international organisations, governments, ISPs and technology companies, and civil society actors, should recognise that criticism of government policies and officials is a legitimate activity and a vital form of expression for civil society. Hence, any measures, whether legal or non-legal, that interfere with or criminalise this legitimate activity should be rescinded or disallowed. Instead, measures should be put in place to ensure that civil society is empowered to call out the blind spots in government policies." (Executive summary)