17 Petitioners could submit empirical evidence on the short-run, medium run, and long run impacts of the shutdown: In the cases examined petitioners did this in a variety of ways. Some petitioners, like in Global Concern Cameroon and Amnesty International Togo estimated the actual economic loss caused by the shutdown. The Jodhpur High Court (Rajasthan, India) in Dhirendra Singh Rajpurohit picked up on the immediate pressing need to resume internet services, which was the ongoing competitive exams for the post of constable and also stated in the order that the internet should not be shut down in the future during competitive exams. Petitioners could provide evidence on the bona fide intentions of circumstances triggering internet shutdowns Several courts relied and considered the national security restriction by picking up on respondents’ arguments about theviolent nature of the protests or the possibility of the protests. In Amnesty International Togo, the Togolese government also attempted to convey that they had tried to broker a compromise. Safeguarding public order or national security could be the countervailing consideration that are prioritised at the expense of freedoms of speech and expression. This is also relevant for determining costs regardless of which way the decision goes. If the protests and the litigation was bona fide, the court is less likely to impose costs. Therefore, providing detailed evidence in the petition on the protests themselves and the lack of sufficient initiative from the government to allow for alternatives, is a sound strategy. Recognising the limitations of international law, foreign judgements and amicus curiae briefs: Provisions of international law and foreign judgements always have persuasive value even though there is only one instance of the court using it explicitly in the judgement as in Aliansi Jurnalis Independen (AJI). Therefore, rather than trying to construct an argument based solely on international law, petitioners should refer to provisions or jurisprudence of international law to bolster a point that already exists in domestic statutes and constitutional jurisprudence. Trying to construct an exclusively international law argument and applying it in absence of a municipal law provision providing for the same is unlikely to work. However, given that some cases have been successful in different jurisdictions, reference to those cases in the petition may be helpful. Similarly, amicus curiae briefs also have persuasive value. However, there are limited references to them in the final judgement. As a result, overt reliance on the value of amicus curiae interventions may not be very fruitful. Sustaining and enhancing greater collaboration, resource sharing and logistical support locally is likely to lead to impactful outcomes.