Back to Index

Freedom of expression under siege
Pedzisayi Ruhanya
September 10, 2006

http://www.thestandard.co.zw/viewinfo.cfm?linkid=21&id=4728

THE use of repressive laws by the Zanu PF government to deny citizens their right to freedom of expression exposes its liberation rhetoric and has completely outwitted the former colonial administrators in its concerted quest to oppress the citizenry.

It is important to note that the use of laws such as the Public Order and Security Act (POSA), the Broadcasting Services Act, (BSA) and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) by the state assist to show the extent to which the government of Zimbabwe has violated its Constitution as well as international and regional instruments pertaining to the right to freedom of expression.

One of the country’s most oppressive laws, POSA replaced the Law and Order Maintenance Act (LOMA) that was enacted in 1960 by the colonial government to restrict freedom of expression, assembly and movement by independence fighters. LOMA remained in place after independence in 1980. However, the Supreme Court led by the late Chief Justice Enoch Dumbutshena and dismissed Chief Justice Anthony Gubbay over the years struck down several clauses as unconstitutional.

POSA tightens restrictions on the independent media and gives the police sweeping powers such as the authorisation of political gatherings. In its report in 2003, Amnesty International pointed out that since its enactment in 2002, POSA has been used by the authorities to target opposition supporters, independent media and human rights activists and specifically restrict their rights to: freely assemble; criticize the government and President; and engage in, advocacy or organize acts of peaceful civil disobedience.

A Fact-Finding Mission report by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights on allegations of human rights violations by the government released in 2004 also noted the adverse effects of POSA on the fundamental civil and political liberties of Zimbabweans. The African Commission report noted that: "There has been a flurry of new legislation and the revival of the old laws used under the Smith Rhodesian regime to control, manipulate public opinion and that limited civil liberties.

"Among these, the Mission’s attention was drawn to the Public Order and Security Act, 2002 and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 2002. These have been used to require registration of journalists and for prosecution of journalists for publishing ‘false information’. All of these, of course, would have a ‘chilling effect’ on freedom of expression and introduce a cloud of fear in media circles."

The African Commission then recommended to the Zimbabwe government as a mark of goodwill to abide by the judgements of the Supreme Court and repeal sections AIPPA calculated to freeze the free expression of public opinion. It further called for the review of POSA.

These findings by an African human rights body to which Zimbabwe is a founding member assist to dispel the usual dismissals of allegations of human rights violations by the authorities as instigated by Western European governments. To show its disregard of the importance of freedom of expression, until to date the recommendations by the African Commission particularly as they relate to the review of laws that infringe on freedom of expression have not been implemented by the government.

Another contentious law that has greater impact on the right to freedom of expression is AIPPA. The law requires among other things the registration of media organisations and journalists practicing in Zimbabwe. Since its enactment in 2002, most Western foreign correspondents particularly from countries like Britain and the USA have been banned from Zimbabwe for practicing without licences given by the government-controlled Media and Information Commission, a statutory body created under AIPPA.

To date five privately-owned newspapers, The Daily News, The Daily News on Sunday, The Weekly Times, The Tribune and The Weekend Tribune were banned between September 2003 and January 2005 for failing to meet the requirements of AIPPA which requires media institutions to register with the Media and Information Commission, provision of a business plan to the Commission, denial of foreign investment in the local media among other restrictions and to deny employment to unregistered journalists.

It is my contention that some of the restrictions required under AIPPA are at variance with the international law provisions, regional provisions, the Constitution of Zimbabwe and the guidelines provided by the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe. For instance, the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe in the case of Chavunduka and another Vs Minister of Home Affairs and another emphasised that any restrictions on freedom of expression must meet the requirements prescribed by the Constitution among others, the protection of the reputations of others, public health and morality as well as security. Any other requirements as prescribed by AIPPA, in my view would be unconstitutional and violates the principle of freedom of expression.

With these facts on the media landscape in Zimbabwe, it would be delusionary to talk about a free press in Zimbabwe except in the imagination of the oppressors in Zanu PF.

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP