ANALYSIS OF COVID-19 REGULATIONS VIS-À-VIS FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE SADC REGION or communicating false statements prejudicial to the State as defined in section 31 (a) (i) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act. with unfettered discretion, permitting them to infringe on human rights using such laws. 80 In Zimbabwe, Section 31 of the Criminal Law Code, which was referenced to in Section 14 of SI 83 of 2020 (Covid 19 regulations) criminalise the publication or communication of false statements that are prejudicial to the state. It prohibits publication or communication of statements, which are wholly or materially false. Among the prohibited statements are those that have adverse effects the economic interests of Zimbabwe.81The Criminal Code does not define what constitutes ‘economic interests’ of the state. It is not stated which economic interests fall within the ambit of this provision. As far as what constitutes illegality is concerned, it is difficult to tell whether one is acting within the confines of the law or has encroached into the realm of activities that warrant arrest. The same applies to the other grounds that warrant arrest. It is not clear what is being regulated as nothing is explicitly stated in definite terms. Essentially, the law does not enumerate what is required and what is prohibited. The prosecuting authorities exercise their discretion in determining the types of conduct that are punishable. Zambia In Zambia publication of false news is an offence that is punishable under the section 67 of the Penal Code. The Zambia Information and Communications Technology Authority (ZICTA) warned the public to refrain from circulating false and unverified information that cause fear and public alarm about COVID-19 using ICT platforms. Madagascar In Madagascar, although the regulations could not be established, in Madagascar there were arrests for publication of false information. Arphine Helisoa, a journalist and publishing director of the newspaper Ny Valosoa, was arrested for spreading fake news and inciting hatred towards President. Arphine Helisoa published a post that was critical of the government’s response to COVID-19. The post questioned the use of excessive force in enforcing the government regulations and the rationale behind opening markets without putting in place any protective measures.79 In Eswatini, the requirement to obtain permission from the minister of health under the COVID- 19 regulations, before using print or electronic media for information on COVID-19 is also not clear and difficult to imagine its enforceability. Such a requirement is difficult to justify and could potentially result in the prohibition of legitimate speech which is a violation of media freedom and could limit meaningful dialogue and public debate on COVID-19. There cannot be freedom of expression Analysis of the disinformation regulations The above-mentioned regulations have been pronounced as a heavy-handed approach to combating disinformation during the coronavirus pandemic. The regulations have also been criticised for their vagueness. The vagueness of a law awards the executive 79 ‘Madagascar: Journalist Held in Pre-Trial Detention as Authorities use Covid-19 Context to Intimidate Journalists’ 9 April 2020 https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr35/2117/2020/en/ (accessed 14 June 2020). 80 D Kaye n 2, para 14. Courts have also condemned vague laws. See: Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom, application No. 58170/13, No. 62322/14 and No. 24960/15, and OOO Flavus and four other applications v. Russia, application No. 12468/15, No. 20159/15, No. 23489/15, No. 19074/16 and No. 61919/16. 81 Zimbabwe Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23], section 31. https://zimbabwe.misa.org 19