Oluchi Uchegbu has built her career on a simple but often ignored premise: digital rights only mean something if people actually know what they are. As founder of Her360Africa and a participant in DigiCivic’s Digital Rights Litigation Surgery, she has spent years working in the space between what the law already protects and what most people, including some practitioners, never learn to use.

 

Asked to explain “digital evidence” to her grandmother using something from her kitchen, she didn’t reach for legal language:

“I would compare digital evidence to the ingredients for making soup. Even after the soup has been eaten, someone who knows what to look for can often tell what ingredients were used… In the same way, digital actions leave traces.”

 

Read the full conversation on preserving evidence before it disappears, arguing online abuse as a rights violation rather than “just something that happened on the internet,” and what she wishes more judges understood.

 

1. What first drew you into digital rights and technology law, and what keeps you working in this space?

 

I am Oluchi Uchegbu, a lawyer and the Founder of Her360Africa, a social enterprise in Nigeria that advocates for digital literacy, digital rights, and digital inclusion. My work has always centered on ensuring that people, especially women and girls, can safely and meaningfully participate in the digital space.

 

What drew me into digital rights was realizing that technology is advancing much faster than many people’s understanding of their rights online. Every day, more aspects of our lives are becoming digital, yet many people do not know how to protect their data, challenge online abuse, or seek legal remedies when their rights are violated. That gap keeps me motivated. I believe the law has a crucial role to play in making the digital space safer, fairer, and more accountable.

 

2. You’ve been part of DigiCivic’s litigation surgery. What’s something from that experience that changed how you approach a case?

 

Attending DigiCivic’s fully sponsored Digital Rights Litigation Surgery was a truly valuable experience. One of the biggest lessons I took away was the importance of approaching digital rights cases from both a legal and technical perspective.

 

The training helped me appreciate that digital evidence tells a story only when it is properly identified, preserved, and presented. It also reinforced the value of working with technical experts where necessary and being more deliberate in asking the right questions about digital systems, metadata, logs, and platform processes rather than relying solely on traditional legal arguments.

 

3. Is there a case or moment in your own practice that changed how you think about the law’s ability to respond to digital harm?

 

A recent example that stands out is the Nigerian Bar Association election, where concerns were raised about the use of lawyers’ personal data for unsolicited election campaign messages. It highlighted how easily personal information can be used in ways people never consented to.

 

For me, it reinforced that digital rights are not abstract concepts. Issues like data privacy, consent, transparency, and accountability have real consequences for trust in institutions and democratic processes. It also showed that our legal system must continue to evolve to effectively address emerging forms of digital harm.

 

4. Since going through the program, has anything shifted in how you argue digital evidence or advise clients on online abuse, a tool, an argument, or a way of framing a case?

 

Absolutely. I now place much greater emphasis on preserving digital evidence from the very beginning. Rather than focusing only on screenshots, I encourage documenting metadata, timestamps, URLs, communication records, and other supporting digital footprints that strengthen a case.

 

I also frame online abuse not merely as harmful conduct but as conduct that can implicate fundamental rights such as privacy, dignity, freedom of expression, and access to justice. That broader perspective often leads to stronger legal arguments and more effective remedies.

 

5. What’s one thing you wish more judges, lawyers, or policymakers understood about digital evidence or online gender-based violence?

 

I wish more stakeholders appreciated that digital evidence is often fragile. It can disappear, be altered, or become inaccessible if it is not preserved promptly and properly.

 

I also hope there is greater recognition that online gender-based violence is not “just happening on the internet.” It has real-world consequences for victims’ safety, mental health, economic opportunities, and participation in public life. Our legal and policy responses should reflect that reality.

 

6. If you had to explain “digital evidence” to your grandmother using something from her kitchen, what would you compare it to?

 

I would compare digital evidence to the ingredients for making soup. Even after the soup has been eaten, someone who knows what to look for can often tell what ingredients were used from the aroma, the taste, or what remains in the pot.

 

In the same way, digital actions leave traces. Even if a message is deleted or a post is removed, there may still be digital footprints—such as timestamps, metadata, logs, or backups—that help tell the story of what happened. Digital evidence is simply those traces that help establish the facts.