Zimbabweans' freedom of speech will be curbed when president Robert Mugabe signs the controversial Interception of Communications Bill, says Rashweat Mukundu, director of Zimbabwe's Media Institute of Southern Africa.
"If Mugabe signs the Bill, which is imminent, the law will empower the government to tap telephone conversations, check e-mails and monitor cyberspace for material seen as posing a threat to national security," explains Mukundu.
The Zimbabwean House of Assembly passed the Bill in mid-June, without amendments, despite previous grievances around some objections by legislators and freedom of speech advocates.
Gross violation
ISPs will be required by law to install hardware and software that will enable authorities to monitor data, Mukundu adds.
The Zimbabwe Internet Service Provider Association is concerned about this proposed legislation. In a statement, it says the lack of judicial involvement and oversight, the potential loss of privacy in communications, as well as the costs and technical difficulties involved in meeting the requirements of the Bill, are worrying.
"The Bill is a gross violation of freedom of expression in Zimbabwe, as government will have the right to monitor absolutely everything from cellphone conversations to e-mails," explains Mathew Takaona, president of the Zimbabwe Union of Journalists.
"It is obvious that political instability and consequent economic turmoil is a threat to government, causing it to monitor freedom of expression even more tightly."
Zimbabwe's official daily newspaper, The Herald, quoted transport and communications minister Christopher Mushohwe as telling Parliament that the Bill had taken into account individual rights, as enshrined in the Constitution, and the national interest.
Threat of terrorism
The proposed law is crucial because the advancement in IT posed a threat to national security, Mushohwe added. (A statement was recorded on Zimbabwean civil rights Web site Kubatana.)
The government has justified its decision by citing Canada, SA, UK and the US as countries with similar legislation to protect citizens against the imposing threat of terrorism, notes Takaona.
However, David Coltart, Zimbabwean MP of Bulawayo South and human rights lawyer, explains the Zimbabwean Bill is different because the entire process will be governed by the executive, and that neither the legislature nor the judiciary has any role in monitoring the system.
"In all other jurisdictions, where a Bill of this nature has been implemented, subsequent arms of government, either the legislature or judiciary, have checks on the process."
Share