A CONSORTIUM of civil society organisations has continued raising alarm over the Cyber Security, Cyber Crime, and Anti-Terrorism Bills before Parliament pointing out loopholes and asking for the withdrawal of the three Bills.
Today, during a press conference, more voices have sprouted and are singing in unison, sharing the same sentiments.
This includes; Kamfisa Member of Parliament Christopher Kang’ombe, the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) and the Media Owners Association of Zambia (MOAZ).
While the group acknowledged Government’s efforts to address cyber threats and terrorism through proposed bills legislation they fear certain provisions of the Bills will risk undermining fundamental rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, national values good governance, democracy and constitutionalism.
“These provisions may contravene fundamental rights, such as the right to privacy and freedom of expression. For instance, the proposed surveillance measures under Parts V and VIII could enable mass data collection by the State without judicial oversight, creating risks of abuse and eroding public trust,” Laz president Lungisani Zulu said.
“Terms like ‘misinformation’ and ‘national security threat’ are undefined, leaving room for subjective interpretation and potential misuse. Effective laws should ensure that security measures are proportionate, necessary, and subject to robust oversight mechanisms to safeguard constitutional freedoms. Laws must also not hinder citizen’s rights to hold accountable those given the mantle to govern, as there can be no democracy without people’s effective participation in Governance.”
Zulu appealed to government not to rush the process of enacting the Bills and called for the withdrawal so that it can be further assessed and worked on.
MISA Zambia chairperson Lauren Mwanza shared that CSOs were not given enough time to analyse the Bills and make proper recommendations.
Mwanza said they were only given two days instead of 10 days.
Meanwhile in a joint statement issued and signed by Alliance for Community Action executive director Laura Miti, it was disclosed that the Bills would grant the Republican President excessive and undemocratic powers.
These powers include the ability to oversee internet use, access private communications, and appoint individuals with extensive surveillance authority.
The CSOs argued that these provisions lack sufficient checks and balances and risk political interference in governance.
“The Cyber Security Bill in Section 3 (1) seeks to establish “the Zambia Cyber Security Agency in the Office of the President which is to be responsible for the administration of the Act under the general direction of the President,” the statement read.
“The Zambia Cyber Security Agency
therefore operates under the direct control of the President, granting sweeping powers
with minimal checks and balances. In instituting the Cyber Security in the Presidency, the Act accords the president unfettered powers to appoint the Director General of the Agency and all its staff.”
Miti explained that the President is envisaged by the Bill to have unchecked powers to appoint the watchdogs of the internet,”who as will be shown later can intercept any communication between any parties in
the country on very vague justifications.”
Furthermore the CSOs stated that bills also propose granting law enforcement officers, or any individuals appointed by the President, the power to intercept communications, access data, and seize devices based on vague justifications.
The risk of abuse of these powers were highlighted as they can be used particularly against activists, journalists, and political opponents, given the lack of safeguards for data security and accountability.
Further, the human rights defenders noted that provisions in the Cyber Crimes Bill, such as penalising the transmission of multiple electronic messages and undefined “unauthorised access” to computer systems, could criminalise legitimate activities like campaigning, cybersecurity testing, or whistleblowing.
The CSOs argue these measures suppress freedom of expression, stifle dissent, and hinder civil society operations.
Meanwhile, the Anti-Terrorism Bill was also criticised for its broad definitions, which the CSOs say could be used to penalise legitimate protests or critical voices under the guise of cyber terrorism.
Citing violations of international treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the CSOs have called for explicit judicial oversight, clearer definitions of offenses, and exemptions for legitimate activities.
And Chapter One Foundation chairperson Serah Lungu said there were already established laws to penalise offenders and wondered why the bills are being rushed.
Lungu urged the withdrawal of the bills to allow for broad consultations and the drafting of legislation that respects democratic principles, protects citizen rights, and addresses cybersecurity concerns without granting unchecked powers to the state.
Further, MOAZ president Costa Mwansa fears the regulatory framework could discourage journalists, NGOs, and civil society organizations from reporting on government actions, jeopardizing journalistic freedom and civil liberties.
Mwansa whose speech was read by Mwanza also noted excessive penalties prescribed in the bill, which MOAZ argued could lead to coercive actions against private citizens and organisations.
By Moses Makwaya
Kalemba December 5, 2024
