Cartoonist and columnist Jim Spire Ssentongo has criticised government officials who retain internet access during nationwide shutdowns, accusing them of entitlement and detachment from ordinary citizens.
In a series of remarks shared on X, Ssentongo argued that state officials should not be expected to feel remorse for enjoying exclusive access to online platforms while the wider population is cut off.
He suggested that such indifference reflects a deeper erosion of conscience within leadership, where public service obligations are treated as privileges rather than responsibilities.
Ssentongo drew parallels between selective internet access and the long-standing practice of political elites seeking medical treatment abroad while domestic healthcare systems remain underfunded.
According to him, leaders who are comfortable abandoning local hospitals should not be surprised when they are equally untroubled by monopolising digital access during critical moments.
He further noted that even when officials face online criticism, insults, or public rejection from citizens they are meant to serve, such reactions are often dismissed as mere bad manners rather than legitimate grievances.
In his view, this mindset shields leaders from accountability and reinforces a culture of entitlement.
Ssentongo also questioned why leaders who preside over such inequalities later express anger or disbelief when they fail to secure electoral support.
He argued that public frustration is a direct response to governance that prioritises elite comfort over citizen welfare.
His comments come amid renewed debate over the use of internet restrictions during politically sensitive periods, with civil society groups warning that shutdowns undermine free expression, access to information, and democratic participation.
While government officials have previously defended such measures on security grounds, critics like Ssentongo insist that selective access exposes deeper governance failures and a widening gap between leaders and the public.