When it comes to mission-critical infrastructure such as digital ID systems, implementing countries are best positioned to determine what will most effectively serve their people. This includes making fundamental decisions regarding how these systems are designed, scaled, and governed, in accordance with national priorities and contextual requirements.
The aforementioned priorities, encompassing legal frameworks to social inclusion goals, are too nuanced and diverse to be addressed through one-size-fits-all solutions. What is required is a technological foundation that can be locally adapted, aligned with a country’s institutional structures and long-term development vision. In the absence of this flexibility, achieving sustainability and lasting impact remains a significant challenge.
This recognition is bringing increased focus to the principle of national ownership, going a step beyond digitalisation and technology adoption. Countries are increasingly looking to shape key aspects of their systems, from implementation to architecture, governance, and future growth. A platform like MOSIP, while informed by global best practices and the on-ground feedback from multiple countries, is only one part of the process. What ultimately matters is how it enables countries to build for themselves, in ways that align with their development goals and institutional frameworks.
Ownership in the technological sense goes beyond just possession. It encompasses the rights to use, modify, and redistribute the software, as well as the ability to see and alter its source code. This concept, often referred to as the four freedoms, was first articulated by Richard M. Stallman in the Free Software Manifesto over four decades ago. This notion of ownership is foundational to the free and open-source software movement, which emerged as a response to the limitations and constraints imposed by proprietary software licenses.
When we extend this concept to nations, the stakes are even higher. For a country, owning its technology – especially something as critical as a national ID system – means having the power to control the infrastructure that underpins its governance. It is the difference between being a passive recipient of technology and being an active participant in its creation and evolution.
The notion of ownership at the national level brings with it a host of implications. Traditionally, countries have struggled with the concept of owning software because mainstream procurement models were designed for tangible assets, not intangible ones like software. Software is elusive – it is licensed, not bought; accessed, not held. This creates a unique set of challenges, particularly the risk of vendor lock-in, where a country becomes dependent on a specific vendor for software updates, maintenance, or even basic operations.
The risk here is not just a matter of convenience or cost. When a country becomes dependent on a specific vendor’s software, it can find itself constrained by the vendor’s terms, unable to modify or enhance the software without the vendor’s involvement. This dependency can have serious consequences, particularly when it comes to critical systems like national IDs. Vendor lock-in can lead to situations where a country’s data security is compromised, or where the government is unable to fully control or understand the software that underpins its identity infrastructure.
In this light, the principle of code is law2, as articulated by Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig, becomes particularly relevant. At its core is the idea of regulation through architecture – that the design of digital systems can shape what is possible and permissible within them. In practice, code governs access, validates identity, structures consent, and directs how data moves, influencing behaviour in real time and embedding rules into everyday interactions.
Applied to national systems, this regulatory role takes on added significance. If the code that runs a nation's critical systems shapes how rights are exercised, how decisions are made, and how information is controlled, then owning that code is not just a technical necessity – it becomes a matter of accountability. As the digital ecosystem grows, code increasingly sets the terms by which residents interact with their government and with each other, making it essential for countries to retain ownership of the systems that govern identity.
At its core, MOSIP is grounded in the principles of open-source software, aligning with Stallman’s four freedoms. But its application goes further, extending these freedoms at a national scale, where ownership means more than just accessing and controlling the code; it means building an ecosystem where countries can build, adapt, and participate in the development of their digital infrastructure.
Lessons from Ethiopia: Building for On-Ground Realities
Ethiopia’s national rollout shows what meaningful ownership can look like in practice. Faced with the challenge of reaching residents in rural areas and those unable to travel to enrolment centres, technologists from the National ID Programme of Ethiopia needed a way to ensure everyone could be registered.
Working with the MOSIP team, the Ethiopian National ID team co-developed an Android-based Registration Client that enabled enrolment through tablets, making doorstep registration possible, efficient, and cost-effective. Far from a standard deployment, this effort represented a direct technical contribution: the country co-developed a core component of the platform, validated it through local field trials, and now operates it at scale.
MOSIP’s role in this process is that of an enabler. It provides countries with the technology, tools, and technical advisory needed to take control of their own digital ID ecosystems. Through this model of co-development, countries are not passive recipients of software, they are collaborators, contributors, and long-term stewards of the systems they build.
This approach ensures that the resulting systems are not only technically robust, but also socially grounded and future-ready. Ownership, in this context, is about developing the in-house capability to innovate, iterate, and scale digital ID infrastructure in ways that reflect the aspirations and realities of the people it is meant to serve.
Owning a national ID system is about ensuring that the software serves the nation’s interests, protecting the rights of residents and maintaining national sovereignty in the current climate. MOSIP’s approach, which emphasises co-development, open-source principles, and technological advisory services, offers a path forward for nations seeking to build and maintain their own identity systems, free from external dependencies and with full control over their digital futures.
References:
