THE Media Institute of Southern Africa-Zimbabwe (Misa-Zimbabwe) has proposed changes to the draft Computer and Cyber Crimes Bill, particularly the protection of whistleblowers and that refusing to help the police unlock a gadget should not be criminalised.
BY PAIDAMOYO MUZULU
Misa-Zimbabwe director Nhlanhla Ngwenya confirmed that his organisation wrote to the Law Development Commission, which is handling the Bill, with proposals, particularly regarding those sections that infringe on the rights of individuals.
Ngwenya said the section on defences by accused should include the protection of whistleblowers.
“The Bill should allow for appropriate whistleblower protection for persons who publish information obtained through what might be classified as unauthorised access or entry but with the public interest at heart, exposing illegal practices, corruption, especially among elected officials,” he said. “The Bill should balance issues of access to information and the perceived national security interests.”
The proposed law in clause 30 makes it an offence for one to refuse to assist a police officer searching a computer system and for that one can be imprisoned for three months if convicted.
Misa-Zimbabwe says individuals have a right to choose not to assist police in searching systems.
“This is unduly burdensome and amounts to outsourcing the job of the police for unpaid labour from ordinary citizens. The general public must not be compelled/forced to do the job of the police. Failure or refusal to assist the police, as required, should not be an offence especially to the general public, who must have the option to decline and should not be forced to provide unpaid labour to the police,” Misa-Zimbabwe suggests.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
The media organisation also takes issue with the punishment for persons found with electronic communication that could be interpreted as harassing someone using a computer or information system.
“This section could potentially target ordinary citizens, who receive memes and other electronic communication, which are deemed degrading or humiliating. Given the widespread use of criminal insult laws to clamp down on free expression, the wording of this section is overbroad,” Misa suggested.
“The offence should be revised to comprise only conduct that one can actually control and be confined only to the person, who initiates the electronic communication with malicious intent.”
