Online Reporter
Miriam Tose Majome
Herald Correspondent
In today’s digital age, explicit content seems more accessible and widespread than ever before in Zimbabwe.
From hard porn social media posts to suggestive live performances, one might assume that the country’s censorship laws have been relaxed.
The reality is far different—Zimbabwe’s legal framework on morality and censorship remain stringent, even as technology reshapes how content is consumed and shared. The proliferation of social media platforms, mobile phones, and other digital technologies has made it easier for people to access and share explicit content, despite it being illegal.
The Censorship and Entertainments Control Act
Contrary to popular belief the Censorship and Entertainments Control Act (Chapter 10:04) remains fully operational. The Censorship Board appointed by the Minister of Home Affairs and Cultural Heritage retains broad authority to regulate:
- Publications (books, magazines)
- Visual and audio content (films, music, performances)
- Public exhibitions and broadcasts.
The Board’s primary function is to advise on what is decent and suitable for public entertainment. This includes reviewing content for public exhibitions, performances, and broadcasts.
Historically, the Board has banned music with explicit content from the airwaves. 1990s urban teens had no choice but to swap around contraband cassette tapes of the American rap group Salt-N-Pepa’s “Push It” and Raze’s “Break for Love” after they were summarily banned from the airwaves.
The Board also restricted some films deemed unsuitable for public viewing and prohibited the sale of explicit magazines. Some decisions have been contested because there is an appeals mechanism. However, the Board’s mandate to uphold “public decency” remains intact.
Licensing and control
Strictly speaking, all modes of public entertainment, be they concerts, film screenings, or artistic exhibitions, require the Board’s approval.
Performers and event organisers must obtain entertainment licenses undertaking to comply with moral standards and public decency. However, this is barely adhered to. There is a tacit belief in the public conscience that a certain level of public indecency is now permitted. Nothing has changed except laxity of enforcement.
It may be argued that some of the censorship rules are outdated, but nonetheless, explicit performances are prohibited. At his discretion the Minister of Home Affairs and Cultural Heritage may override the Board’s decisions and may permit or ban content.
This discretionary power has led to accusations of inconsistency and political bias within the entertainment sector as ministerial decisions can appear arbitrary rather than based on clear legal standards.
The now abandoned Brazilian-themed street carnival introduced in Harare by Ministry of Tourism circa 2017 comes to mind. The authorities turned a blind eye to the public lewdness that was part of the show. Needless to say, some of the main aspects of the foreign carnival were embarrassing and strange in this part of the world, but it was Government sanctioned.
Technology vs the Law: A losing battle?
The rise of social media, smartphones, and VPNs has made censorship enforcement increasingly difficult. While the Censorship Board has attempted to keep pace with these developments, the law has not.
It is clear that the law is struggling to adapt to the rapid pace of technological change. The sheer volume of online material and the anonymity of internet users poses a major challenge for law enforcement.
This has led to calls for the law to be revised and updated to take account of the new realities of the digital age.
Should the censorship laws be changed to reflect the digital realities of the day or should censorship as a thing be done away with altogether?
The issue is whether the Government can realistically control online content and the internet. Other questions also arise on what role should self-regulation and parental controls play.
Other countries are grappling with the challenges posed by smartphones and interference with education.
Over 60 countries have imposed laws restricting smartphone use in schools. This shows censorship is not unique to Zimbabwe. Some form or level of censorship is necessary to avoid anarchy.
Stricter laws or a new approach?
Zimbabwe’s censorship laws remain rigid on paper, but technology is outpacing what is written in the statutes and law enforcement.
The current law is rooted in pre-digital era thinking, and it struggles to address modern challenges, like revenge porn, deepfakes, and viral explicit content. As society evolves, so too must the law.
A balanced approach protecting public morality without stifling expression may require legal reforms, clearer guidelines, and better digital policing strategies. It is clear that the law is facing significant challenges, and as technology continues to evolve and new platforms emerge, it is essential for the law to adapt to these changes. This may require a fundamental rethink of the censorship laws and the development of new laws and regulations that take account of the realities of the digital age without compromising public decency.
Miriam Tose Majome is a lawyer and a Commissioner with the Zimbabwe Media Commission. She writes in her personal capacity and can be contacted on [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
