FORGET politics and read this carefully.
Ever since the Cyber Security No. 3 and Cyber Crimes No. 4 Acts of 2025 were refined, there have been many misconceptions and misunderstandings when it comes to interpretation.
One of these misinterpretations is the belief that filming or taking a picture of someone engaging in a harmful, wrongful or illegal act without their consent is a crime.
Many people think you cannot record someone in public even if they are doing something blatantly wrong without their consent.
Here’s the truth, the law does not prohibit capturing or posting footage of someone engaged in a criminal, unlawful or harmful act, especially when it is in the public interest.
For example, if your neighbour is beating a child or a police officer is harassing a vendor or a man is assaulting a woman in broad daylight, you are within your legal rights to record that act.
You do not need the perpetrator’s permission to document and expose them.
According to Section 10 of the Cyber Crimes Act No. 4 of 2025, the recording of private conversations without notice is a crime—not the public filming of unlawful or inhumane acts.
Section 10(1) says it is an offence to record a private conversation without notifying the parties involved.
This is aimed at protecting intimate or confidential communications.
No wonder, those people privileged to have iPhones can attest that when someone calls them and is recording them, they get a notification, so as to the company complies with the law in their country.
“A person commits an offence if that person, using a device, records a private conversation without notifying the parties to the conversation, whether or not that person is a party to the private conversation,” states Section 10 (1) of the Act.
“A person who contravenes subsection (1), commits an offence and is liable, on conviction, to a fine not exceeding two
hundred thousand penalty units or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to both,” reads (2).
The law, however, provides important exceptions.
Section 10(3) states that recording is not an offence when it is unintentional, done by law enforcement officers responding to a threat of violence, property damage or an anticipated crime or when it is reasonably necessary for the protection of the lawful interests of a party to the conversation.
This provision has been interpreted to mean that individuals capturing video footage of criminal or inhumane acts such as assaults, harassment or public abuse are not in breach of the Act, particularly when done to expose wrongdoing or protect victims.
However, the right to film or record does not extend to invading people’s privacy in their homes, bathrooms or during confidential conversations.
Such actions can still attract penalties under Section 10(1), which prescribes a fine of up to K60,000 or imprisonment of up to two years, or both.
“Despite subsection (1), it shall not be an offence to record a private conversation where (a) the private conversation is unintentionally recorded through a device; (b), a law enforcement officer reasonably suspects that there is (i) a threat to life or an imminent threat of serious violence to a person; (ii) a threat of substantial damage to property; or
(iii) an offence under any written law that may be committed; or (c) it is reasonably necessary for the protection of the lawful interests of a party to the conversation,” reads Section 10 subsection (3).
By Catherine Pule
Picture for illustration
Kalemba, April 30, 2025
