The Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) has expressed its concerns over the proposed Cybersecurity Bill currently under consideration by the National Assembly. While acknowledging the government’s intent to tackle cyber threats and terrorism, LAZ has cautioned that certain provisions in the Bill could undermine constitutional rights and democratic principles.
In its statement, LAZ highlighted that some clauses in the Bill risk violating fundamental rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. These include the right to privacy and freedom of expression, both of which are critical for a functioning democracy.
Specifically, LAZ pointed out the potential dangers posed by Parts V and VIII of the Bill, which propose surveillance measures allowing the State to conduct mass data collection. The lack of mandatory judicial oversight for such surveillance raises the risk of abuse and could erode public trust in state institutions.
Moreover, LAZ noted the absence of clear definitions for terms like “misinformation” and “national security threat.” This ambiguity, according to the association, creates room for subjective interpretation, which could be exploited to suppress dissent or target critics unjustly.
LAZ emphasized that any cybersecurity legislation must strike a balance between national security and individual freedoms. The association recommended the following measures to ensure this balance: mandatory judicial oversight for all surveillance requests, precise definitions of key terms, and penalties for the misuse of powers under the proposed laws to ensure accountability.
To address its concerns, LAZ has urged the government to undertake extensive consultations with all relevant stakeholders. These include civil society organizations, human rights advocates, legal experts, the private sector, and the general public. LAZ warned that rushing the Bill’s enactment without adequate input could do more harm than good.
The association also recommended aligning the Bill with international best practices, such as the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, which provides a framework for balancing security measures with individual freedoms.
In conclusion, LAZ called on the government to withdraw the proposed Cybersecurity Bill from Parliament and initiate a transparent and inclusive consultative process before reintroducing it. According to LAZ, this approach will ensure that the legislation upholds constitutional freedoms while addressing the legitimate need for cybersecurity.
LAZ’s stance underscores the importance of balancing national security objectives with democratic values, a principle enshrined in Zambia’s Constitution and critical to fostering trust between the government and its citizens
The cyber laws in place birthed by PF were vigorously rejected by the UPND. The same draconian laws are not currently embraced by our government, but they have chosen to add more salt to the wound. Thus most laws are meant to prolong the stay of leaders in govt and protection for their rein. Aren’t the existing current online laws enough?
LT………
why are you not publishing the response by Gary nkombo to the alleged corruption regarding the ambulance tenders ????
Are you now only publishers or rumours, innuendos and one sided accounts ?? Depending on who you support ???
There is a response to your publication of the story you published, yet you chose to keep your readers in the dark about the response from GRZ ????
Let have ethical reporting……..
Forwadee 2031……..
Ethics in social media?? Bwaha ha ha! Do these guys know professionalism? These guys are looking for traffic to their websites so any rumor is passed on to the audience faster than bugs bunny.
Because we are scared. He can come and pour Kachasu in our reporter’s mouth
What else, apart from being shy by not reading the response from GRZ.
a pocket crime for law enforcement in future for critics and oppsition party!
Preoccupied with fixing silencing critic, yet hospitals are in deplorable condition.
Ba LAZ: you call for extensive consultation with all stakeholders and you leave out the most affected? What kind of lawyers are you?
The fourth estate, the news media will be most affected by these draconian laws! Even you lawyers can’t exercise freedom of expression if the media isn’t free!
That is what you yourselves are saying here: “the right to privacy and freedom of expression, both of which are critical for a functioning democracy”
No matter what you do, there will come a time when you be forced out of power…. people never learn. Let them go ahead with it but the same law will catch them once out of power. Why don’t people live “reality”?
In Philosophy we say, they live in the “Here Now” world. Like animals, they cant think past now.