The Misuse of Sedition and Hate Speech Charges by the UPND Government: A Grave Threat to Freedom of Expression and Accountability in Zambia
By Thandiwe Ketis Ngoma
In democratic societies, freedom of speech is not just a right—it is the bedrock upon which citizens hold their leaders accountable, voice grievances, and engage in national discourse. However, in Zambia today, this fundamental pillar of democracy is under direct assault. Since coming to power, the United Party for National Development (UPND), led by President Hakainde Hichilema, has weaponized sedition and hate speech laws to silence dissent, undermining civic freedoms and quashing legitimate criticism. This dangerous trend reflects an authoritarian drift, eroding the very essence of Zambia’s democracy, leaving citizens wondering whether their voices will ever be heard again without fear of retribution.
Escalation of Sedition and Hate Speech Charges in Zambia
The UPND government’s alarming escalation in using sedition and hate speech charges has fostered an environment of fear, intimidation, and self-censorship. Originally intended to protect public order and social harmony, these laws are now being exploited to punish anyone who dares to challenge or criticize the government’s policies. This perversion of legal instruments has turned everyday political discourse into criminal acts, sending a chilling message to citizens: express any criticism of the government, and you risk facing legal consequences.
Several high-profile cases exemplify this disturbing trend. Opposition leaders, journalists, and ordinary citizens have been investigated, detained, or prosecuted simply for expressing frustration over the government’s failures to manage the economy, tackle unemployment, or curb the rising cost of living. For instance, figures such as Hon. Raphael Nakacinda, Hon. Munir Zulu, Mr. Thomas Zgambo, Ambassador Mwamba, and Dr. Fred M’membe have been targeted after openly speaking out about Zambia’s economic challenges—only to find themselves facing sedition charges under accusations of “incitement to violence.” The misuse of these charges criminalizes dissent, instilling fear that any form of political criticism could lead to severe legal repercussions.
Sedition Charges as a Tool for Political Suppression
Sedition laws were originally crafted to protect national security, yet the UPND government has distorted their purpose to suppress political opposition. By expanding the definition of sedition to encompass any criticism of the government—no matter how peaceful or constructive—the ruling party has weaponized the law to quash legitimate debate. One stark example of this overreach is the case of Patriotic Front Secretary General Raphael Nakacinda, who was charged with sedition for questioning the government’s stance on aflatoxin contamination in mealie meal. What should have been a legitimate discussion on public health concerns was instead twisted into an accusation of “incitement to violence,” a vague and politically charged claim that raises serious alarms about the government’s overbearing control over public discourse.
This broad and arbitrary application of sedition charges creates a pervasive climate of fear where citizens are compelled to self-censor rather than risk prosecution for expressing their opinions. This not only stifles political participation but also undermines the very concept of accountable governance. A government that operates in secrecy, shielded from scrutiny, becomes less responsive to public needs, and critical issues—like economic mismanagement, corruption, and policy failures—are left unaddressed.
Weaponizing Hate Speech Laws to Silence Political Opposition
While hate speech laws are necessary to combat genuine threats to social cohesion, the UPND government has systematically distorted their purpose to stifle political opposition. A glaring example is the case of Dr. Chishimba Kambwili, who was not only charged with hate speech but was also sentenced to five months in prison for raising concerns about alleged tribalism. This case reveals a deliberate strategy to conflate criticism of the government with incitement to social unrest, blurring the lines between legitimate political dissent and so-called “hate speech.” In doing so, the UPND has created a dangerous loophole that allows it to silence its critics under the guise of promoting national unity.
The ambiguity surrounding the definition of hate speech further exacerbates the problem. Without clear and specific guidelines, the government has the discretion to label any criticism as hate speech, thereby turning legitimate political discourse into a prosecutable offense. This tactic is not only an assault on freedom of expression but also a deliberate attempt to suppress the democratic function of public debate. By silencing dissenting voices, the UPND stifles the healthy debates that are essential for a functioning democracy.
Examples of Misuse and Its Damaging Consequences
The consequences of misusing sedition and hate speech laws are already being felt across Zambia. One notable example is journalist Thomas Zgambo, who is currently facing sedition charges after publishing an article that criticized the government’s economic policies. This case starkly illustrates the dangers of expanding sedition laws beyond their intended scope, warning journalists, activists, and citizens alike that any critique of the government could lead to harsh legal consequences.
These cases have created a climate of fear, where even the most basic forms of political criticism are met with threats of legal action. Media outlets are increasingly cautious in their reporting, self-censoring to avoid government retaliation. In a healthy democracy, a free press and active civic engagement are essential for holding leaders accountable. Yet, under the UPND government, these democratic cornerstones are being systematically undermined, replaced by an atmosphere of intimidation and censorship that shields the government from public scrutiny. The simple act of speaking out has become perilous, endangering the rights and freedoms that democracy is supposed to protect.
Eroding Public Trust and the Democratic Foundation
By weaponizing sedition and hate speech laws, the UPND government is eroding the trust that citizens place in both the state and the judicial system. Criminalizing dissent sends a dangerous message to the public: expressing dissatisfaction with the government can lead to severe consequences. This tactic deepens the divide between the government and the people, turning citizens into mere subjects rather than active participants in the democratic process.
Moreover, when the judiciary is manipulated as a tool for political repression, rather than an impartial arbiter of justice, the public’s confidence in the rule of law falters. Citizens who see the legal system as biased and politically motivated are less likely to respect its authority, leading to a breakdown in social cohesion and increasing the risk of civil unrest. Public disillusionment with the justice system not only destabilizes society but also weakens the legitimacy of Zambia’s democratic institutions.
The Need for Transparent Governance and Legal Reform
To restore public trust and preserve Zambia’s democracy, the UPND government must immediately halt the misuse of sedition and hate speech laws. Legal reforms are urgently needed to narrow the scope of these laws and introduce robust oversight mechanisms that prevent their abuse for political ends. Clear and precise definitions must be put in place to ensure that these laws cannot be weaponized against critics or used to stifle free expression.
The government must understand that true political strength lies not in suppressing dissent but in engaging with it constructively. Public criticism serves as a vital check on government policies, offering valuable feedback and identifying areas for improvement. Silencing critics only fuels mistrust and alienation, severing the essential connection between the government and the people it is meant to serve. The UPND must realize that a healthy democracy thrives on the free exchange of ideas and is strengthened by its willingness to confront, rather than suppress, public grievances.
Conclusion: Protecting Freedom of Speech as an Imperative for Zambia’s Democracy
The UPND government’s increasing reliance on sedition and hate speech charges to silence dissent poses a grave and existential threat to Zambia’s democracy. While these laws may have legitimate purposes, their abuse undermines citizens’ rights, weakens democratic institutions, and erodes the very foundations of good governance. The UPND must recognize that attempts to control public discourse through legal repression not only diminish the nation’s democratic values but also jeopardize its future stability.
If Zambia is to thrive as a true democracy, freedom of expression must be vigorously protected, and the judiciary must remain independent, impartial, and free from political influence. Upholding these principles is essential to ensuring that Zambia’s government remains accountable to its people and that citizens continue to play an active role in shaping the nation’s future. Only through respect for free speech, judicial independence, and transparent governance can Zambia safeguard the integrity of its democratic institutions and build a prosperous future for all its people.