🇿🇲 EDITOR’S NOTE | Civility, Cyber Law & Limits of Political Expression
Zambia Police have confirmed the arrest of Mambwe Zimba for alleged “Transmission of Deceptive Electronic Communication” under Section 19(1)(a) of the Cyber Crimes Act No. 4 of 2025.
According to the official statement issued by Deputy Public Relations Officer Chipo Kaitisha, the suspect is alleged to have “transmitted a deceptive and misleading electronic image on a Facebook page known as ‘Zambia for All 2026,’ falsely depicting the Republican President and Commander-in-Chief of the Defence Force, Mr. Hakainde Hichilema, lying in a coffin.” Police further state that the publication “was false and misleading to members of the public both within and outside the country.”
This development comes at a politically sensitive time. Campaign season is fast approaching. Emotions are high. Narratives are sharpening.
But there is a line.
Political disagreement is lawful. Criticism is lawful. Satire is lawful within reasonable bounds. What is not lawful under Zambia’s current cyber framework is the deliberate creation and dissemination of deceptive digital content designed to mislead, provoke unrest, or simulate harm.
Artificial intelligence tools have made image manipulation effortless. A few clicks can fabricate a funeral. A few prompts can manufacture a crisis. A few seconds can ignite public outrage.
Technology has moved faster than political maturity.
Some in the opposition will inevitably frame this arrest as an attempt to gag dissent. This concern deserves to be heard. Any law touching speech must be scrutinized to ensure it is not weaponized selectively.
However, laws governing cyber deception are not inherently anti-opposition. They are protective instruments. They exist to shield citizens, public institutions and even political actors themselves from fabricated digital harm.
Today it is a sitting President. Tomorrow it could be an opposition leader. Next week it could be a private citizen.
The Cyber Crimes Act was enacted precisely because digital misinformation has consequences in real life. False death imagery of a Head of State is not mere banter. It has diplomatic implications. It has security implications. It has economic implications. Markets react to instability. Investors react to signals of unrest. Citizens react to fear.
Free expression must not be confused with digital vandalism.
Democracy thrives on debate, not deception.
As campaigns gather momentum, Zambia must resist descending into algorithm-driven hostility. Political competition should revolve around policy, economics, governance records and alternative visions for the country.
The public square must remain robust. But it must also remain responsible. Civility is not weakness. It is democratic discipline.
Opposition voices have every right to challenge the President on policy, on performance, on debt, on energy, on mining, on education, on asset recovery. Those are legitimate arenas of contest.
Simulated coffins are not.
The test now is consistency. Enforcement must be even-handed across political divides. The same standard applied here must apply elsewhere. Selective prosecution would erode public trust. Neutral enforcement strengthens the rule of law.
Zambia is entering an election year. Institutions will be tested. Politicians will be tested. Citizens will be tested. The digital age demands responsibility equal to its reach.
The law must protect everyone. And politics must remain a battle of ideas, not manufactured funerals.
© The People’s Brief | Editors
The Zambian Police has ever been advising the general public against making and or sharing articles that may hurt or disturb people, it being oral or video or any form in the social media.This advice has been there for so long.It is better to avoid at all times, the pictures that are so sensitive may affect some minds of other people to cause them to react in different ways, it is therefore not just good to be involved in such activities directly or indirectly.To be found in possession of such materials can also lead to immediate arrest by authority responsible with the maintenance of law and order.