Zambia’s recent Cyber Security Act and Cyber Crimes Act, enacted in 2025 as replacements for earlier legislation, have sparked ongoing legal challenges over potential conflicts with constitutional rights to privacy, freedom of expression, and press freedom. These laws, which regulate lawful interception and digital communication, are under judicial scrutiny amid broader concerns about government surveillance powers and vague restrictions on expression.
Legal framework and contested provisions
The Cyber Security Act establishes a Central Monitoring and Coordination Center responsible for all lawful communication interceptions and creates a Cyber Security Agency under the President’s direction. Law enforcement officers must obtain ex-parte High Court orders before intercepting communications, but exceptions permit warrantless intercepts in emergencies, requiring only retrospective judicial notification. Critics highlight broad definitions, such as “potential or actual threat to national security,” which could justify extensive surveillance.
Notably, the laws lack clear safeguards for handling intercepted data, including its retention, examination, or destruction. While the Data Protection Act of 2021 offers some protections, broad national security exemptions undermine these guarantees. Another concern is the presidential power to designate “law enforcement officers,” expanding surveillance authority without checks, increasing risks of politically motivated monitoring.
Impact on freedom of expression and press
The Cyber Crimes Act criminalizes publishing “obscene, vulgar, lewd, lascivious or indecent” material intended to humiliate or harass, as well as false information damaging a person’s reputation. Human rights advocates argue these vague terms grant excessive discretion to authorities, raising fears of censorship. Criminalizing defamation contrasts with regional and UN recommendations favoring civil remedies.
Also problematic is a non-disclosure provision barring individuals from revealing the existence of investigation orders, which can extend to ordinary users, journalists, and activists, potentially chilling free speech and access to legal remedies. The broad definition of “interception” includes journalistic activities, with limited protections for whistleblowers, generating legal uncertainty for media workers. Mandatory assistance clauses compel individuals knowledgeable about computer systems to aid law enforcement without adequate privilege safeguards.
Ongoing litigation and governmental context
The Law Association of Zambia filed a High Court challenge in July 2025 against several provisions of the Cyber Crimes Act, contesting interception, search and seizure, and mandatory assistance rules. This follows a similar 2021 challenge to the original law, which led to legislative revisions. The current court decision is expected to significantly influence Zambia’s digital rights framework and legislative reforms.
Meanwhile, the government’s last-minute postponement of the 2026 RightsCon summit, initially planned for Lusaka, citing alignment with national values and priorities, highlights the unpredictable governance environment surrounding Zambia’s cyber regulations.
Why it matters
Zambia’s new cyber laws affect how government agencies access digital data, with implications for privacy, free speech, and press freedoms in a country bound by international human rights treaties. Judicial rulings on these laws will impact both individuals’ rights and the operations of companies subject to data access requests. The ongoing legal battles and policy uncertainty demand close attention from civil society, businesses, and digital rights advocates.
Background
The Cyber Security and Cyber Crimes Act was originally adopted in 2021 following limited consultation, drawing criticism from rights groups and resulting in court challenges. The current 2025 legislation was introduced as a reform but retains contentious provisions. Zambia’s Constitution guarantees privacy and expression rights, which international agreements like the ICCPR and African human rights charters further protect, setting standards that these laws are expected to meet.
Sources
This article is based on reporting and publicly available information from the following source:
Read more AI Regulation stories on Goka World News.