THE announcement by TONSE Alliance national youth chairman Celestine Mukandila to challenge Zambia’s newly enacted Cyber laws marks a pivotal moment in the country’s democratic journey.
It is a moment that demands sober reflection—not only on the content and intent of this legislation but on what it means for the fundamental freedoms enshrined in our Constitution.
Mr Mukandila’s concerns are not misplaced. The new Cyber laws, passed without broad-based consultation or a national referendum, appear to alter the delicate balance between national security and civil liberties.
If indeed these laws infringe upon the Bill of Rights by curtailing freedom of expression, the right to privacy, and press freedom, then they strike at the very core of Zambia’s constitutional democracy.
What makes this situation more alarming is the manner in which the law empowers state institutions and politicians to potentially monitor, suppress, and even criminalize dissent under the guise of cybersecurity.
There is no question that the country needs laws to protect its digital infrastructure and citizens from cybercrime. However, such laws must not come at the expense of personal freedoms. Cybersecurity should enhance safety—not muzzle free speech.
Mr Mukandila rightly points out the threat this legislation poses to investigative journalism.
A free press is not only a watchdog but also a cornerstone of any functioning democracy. Undermining journalists’ ability to uncover corruption or wrongdoing is tantamount to silencing the voice of the people. When the law becomes a tool for intimidation rather than protection, it ceases to serve its purpose and becomes an instrument of authoritarianism.
The issue of how the law will be implemented also raises serious red flags. As Mr Mukandila notes,
Section 1 gives the President the power to set the commencement date through statutory instrument. This leaves the door open for potential abuse, especially in an election period where information control could tip the scales unfairly. Challenging this provision in court is not just a legal necessity—it is a democratic imperative.
In light of these concerns, the call for civil society organizations, legal minds, and the media to rally together is both timely and essential.
A fragmented response will only embolden those seeking to limit freedoms under the pretext of national interest. Unity among defenders of democracy is crucial in resisting laws that overreach their mandate.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Any legislation that contradicts it must be subjected to rigorous judicial scrutiny. We commend those who have taken the initiative to challenge this law and urge all Zambians to remain vigilant and engaged.
Let us not forget: democracy thrives when rights are protected, voices are heard, and laws are crafted with transparency and accountability.
The government must listen to the growing chorus of concern and return to the drawing board—this time with the people’s voice at the centre of the process.
