The current digital revolution is leading to new ethical questions that everyone is invited to address. Today, the internet offers us almost unconditional access to information as well as opportunities for virtual debates on various societal issues. In a rapidly technological society, no one can ignore the effects of communication and information sciences on intersubjective relations. Today, within ECOWAS, the man of advanced modernity is faced with a dilemma: on the one hand, the cyber-optimists who are in favour of the opportunity offered by ICTs to express themselves and exercise unlimited freedom of communication with the rest of the world, and on the other hand, the cyber-realists, who, for their part, consider ICTs as tools for alienating democracy. In this article, it is a question of showing, through the politics of deliberative democracy, through the theory of discussion which is embodied in the concept of an ideal procedure of deliberation and decision-making through pragmatic reflection, compromise, discussion, collective agreement, that relating to justice, argumentation and communication offered by the internet and social networks to men is sometimes presented as an alienated and pathological freedom of communication. This is why we would like to propose an approach to analytic philosophy through Habermasian deliberative politics in order to understand the relationship between democratic society and ICTs (first part), in order to better understand the challenges of cybercrime within ECOWAS (second part), and finally the security measures put in place by them. This article aims to show that the unlimited freedom of communication offered by the internet and social media may, from the perspective of Habermas’s theory of discourse, turn out to be an ‘alienated and pathological’ freedom rather than pure democratic progress.