Fresh evidence exposing the depth of what authors described as Zimbabwe’s “repressive” media landscape emerged this week, with a detailed investigation documenting deepening risks confronting journalists, particularly those operating outside the orbit of state media.
The document by campaign group INTELWATCH represents one of the most comprehensive attempts yet to map the threats facing a profession where professionals navigate legal traps, political pressure, digital surveillance and deepening economic fragility.
Through the document titled Media Capture and the Illusion of Media Plurality: Mapping Threats to the Media in Zimbabwe, the South Africa-based watchdog laid bare the frustrations of journalists trying to tell the country’s story in a highly-polarised media ecosystem.
It said Zimbabwe’s journalism has been fractured along partisan lines, battering outlets during a period when transparency is critical for economic renewal. The ruptured landscape partly explains why economic recovery remains elusive in a country struggling to keep pace with shifting global dynamics.
INTELWATCH painted a clear portrait of a media tightly gripped by state power — from legal intimidation and regulatory threats to attempts to influence narratives in private media houses. But the most startling allegations relate to the expansion of surveillance capabilities by state agencies, including the acquisition of advanced digital spying technology allegedly supplied by some of the world’s most controversial cyber intelligence firms.
Keep Reading
- Act on Pandora Papers expose
- Pandora Papers: Top Mnangagwa official exposed in biggest leak
- Act on Pandora Papers expose
- Pandora Papers: Top Mnangagwa official exposed in biggest leak
From regulatory intimidation and institutional interference to alleged surveillance operations and digital monitoring, the document concludes that Zimbabwe remains one of the most hostile environments in which to practise journalism.
Many of these threats have long been discussed in isolation — arrests, prolonged detentions, harassment of reporters and the financial vulnerability of independent media houses. However, when compiled into a single forensic account, the cumulative impact reveals a profession operating under sustained siege.
Perhaps most striking is the report’s argument that “repression” has evolved rather than disappeared. It argues that while the arrival of President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s administration in 2017 raised hopes of a more tolerant political climate, the present reality reflects a more subtle, but equally formidable, system of control.
“While the advent of President Mnangagwa’s Second Republic initially promised a departure from the Mugabe era’s overt belligerence, the reality in 2026 is a sophisticated system of legalised repression and elite capture of the media,” the report claimed.
“Zimbabwean journalists currently face severe threats, including legal restrictions, direct political interference, surveillance, arrests and physical violence, as well as dire economic vulnerabilities, which has resulted in a hostile operating environment.
“Contemporary threats to the media have evolved from the blunt force of the early 2000s to a more insidious form of lawfare.”
INTELWATCH argued modern forms of repression increasingly rely on legislation and technology rather than overt physical intimidation.
“This includes the weaponisation of cyber-security legislation and a nascent, albeit terrifying, trend of conflating investigative journalism with subversion and terrorism,” the authors said.
A significant part of the study focused on the expansion of surveillance capabilities within Zimbabwe’s security architecture.
The report traced the roots of modern digital monitoring to the Interception of Communications Act of 2007, introduced during the late former president Robert Mugabe’s administration.
The law grants the state sweeping powers to intercept phone calls, emails and other forms of communication with limited judicial oversight. But according to INTELWATCH, surveillance infrastructure has expanded significantly in recent years with the acquisition of sophisticated spyware technologies.
A 2025 study by digital rights organisation Unwanted Witness, cited in the report, warned that unchecked digital spying across parts of East and southern Africa was “stifling free expression, intimidating dissenting voices and threatening democracy”.
Zimbabwe was listed among the countries where these technologies are allegedly being deployed. The report claims Zimbabwe has been linked to spyware developed by an Israeli cyber-intelligence firm, best known for its controversial Pegasus software.
Pegasus has drawn global scrutiny because of its ability to infiltrate smartphones, extract messages, emails and photographs, and even activate microphones and cameras without a user’s knowledge.
Civil society organisations in Zimbabwe have previously raised alarm over such technologies. In 2021, the Media Institute of Southern Africa (Misa) Zimbabwe wrote to Parliament expressing concern over reports that the government had acquired surveillance tools from the Israeli telecommunications intelligence company Circles.
According to research by the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, Circles technology exploits weaknesses in the global mobile phone signalling system — known as Signalling System No.7 (SS7) — allowing operators to track phone locations and intercept communications.
Citizen Lab’s investigation, titled Running in Circles: Uncovering the Clients of Cyberespionage Firm Circles, identified several governments across Africa, including Zimbabwe, as users of the surveillance technology.
The report alleged that such tools could allow authorities to track individuals across borders and monitor communications without warrants, raising serious concerns for journalists investigating corruption, national security issues or politically sensitive topics. The legal architecture supporting these systems also extends beyond the 2007 interception law.
In 2013, the government gazetted Statutory Instrument 142 of 2013, requiring the registration of mobile phone subscribers — a move critics say strengthened the ability of security agencies to track communications.
Public remarks by senior officials have also fuelled concerns over the extent of surveillance.
In 2014, then state security minister Didymus Mutasa openly acknowledged the existence of extensive monitoring systems.
“The government sees everything,” Mutasa said at the time. “We have our means of seeing things… so no one can hide from us in this country.”
After leaving government in 2015, Mutasa reiterated those claims, saying: “Your phones are listened to a lot. The CIO is huge and it produces many reports.”
For Zimbabwean journalists, the report concludes, the result is a profession increasingly forced to operate under a cloud of legal risk, digital surveillance and political pressure — conditions that continue to cast a long shadow over the country’s democratic and economic future.
Nick Mangwana, permanent secretary in the Ministry of information said: “The government firmly rejects the characterisation of Zimbabwe’s media environment as ‘repressive’. This description is an inaccurate relic of the past that fails to recognise the profound democratic reforms implemented under the Second Republic”.
“Since 2017, the government has taken deliberate steps to open up civic and political space. The most significant of these was the repeal of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) and the enactment of the Freedom of Information Act . This law is a cornerstone of transparency, enshrining the constitutional right of citizens to access information held by the State,” he said.
“Far from being a ‘tool for criticism’, as some have framed it, this Act is designed to be a bridge between the government and the people . The Zimbabwe Media Commission (ZMC) is currently undertaking nationwide awareness programmes to ensure public officers understand their duty to provide information, empowering citizens and fostering trust . If the media environment were truly repressive, such a law would not exist, nor would the government be investing in its implementation.”
“I wish to state categorically that, contrary to the report's implications, there are no journalists in prison in Zimbabwe for simply doing their jobs. Journalists are free to operate within the bounds of the law, just as they are in any other sovereign nation. Regarding the Interception of Communications Act [Chapter 11:04] (ICA), the report deliberately ignores the legal safeguards built into the legislation to prevent abuse. It is standard practice for sovereign states to have legal frameworks for interception in the interest of national security. While the Act is currently under review to ensure full alignment with the 2013 Constitution, it already contains provisions to ensure that any interception is not arbitrary,” Mangwana told the Zimbabwe Independent.