Zambia and South Sudan begin enforcing controversial cybercrime laws
Details
Vaughan O’Grady
Category: Regulation
22 July 2026
324 views
Zambia has apparently begun enforcing its Cyber Crimes Act No. 4 of 2025. The government has warned that the unauthorised recording, publication or distribution of private communications could result in criminal penalties.
According to Ecofin, in a statement issued on 19 July, the country’s Ministry of Information and Media said the law was fully operational and urged citizens and public officials to comply.
Zambia’s Cyber Crimes Act operates alongside its Cyber Security Act and the Data Protection Act. The laws govern online communications, cybersecurity and personal data, including their handling by digital platforms, financial institutions, telecommunications companies and other <a href="https://absafricatv.com/serbia-names-nigeria-its-top-business-partner-in-africa/” title=”Serbia Names Nigeria Its Top Business Partner In Africa”>businesses. Their requirements also apply to growing sectors such as digital banking, mobile money and e-commerce.
While cybercrime is undoubtedly an increasing threat across Africa, some state-led legal responses have been controversial as opposition parties, media organisations and digital rights groups, among others, have suggested they could increase state surveillance and restrict freedom of expression. Indeed, the Law Association of Zambia made clear last year that it had just such concerns last year about the Cyber Security Act.
And worries are not just being expressed in Zambia. Last week saw the news that the South Sudanese government has officially begun implementing the Cybercrime and Computer Misuse Act, 2026, a law that authorities say is intended to strengthen cybersecurity and combat online crime.
Like the Zambian law, this has attracted criticism, notably because some sections are so broadly worded that they could be used to criminalise legitimate criticism of the government, restrict independent journalism and silence political opponents.
Critics have expressed particular concern over offences related to ‘undesirable’ online content and the publication of ‘false or misleading information’, apparently due to the absence of clear legal definitions and the potential for selective enforcement.
