ANALYSIS OF COVID-19 REGULATIONS VIS-À-VIS FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE SADC REGION if public debate or dialogue on matters on public concern is stifled. including health experts is grappling with. Consequently, there are still grey areas regarding this disease and to expect all information to be authenticated information is impossible. Thus, while restrictions are necessary as part of crisis management, it is important to note that the restrictions should not be excessively criminalised and leave room investigate and explore this COVID-19 phenomenon. Also, regarding the enforceability of the disinformation regulations, for all the countries that have been identified, there is no indication that the law enforcement departments were trained to handle disinformation cases. This lack of training could result in unfair and unjustified arrests because of the failure by the police to comprehend the determinants of disinformation. 82Also, it will be cumbersome to prove or defend elements such as the ‘intension to deceive, rumours and opinions.’83There are instances where intention to deceive or to cause harm could not have been foreseen. Such vaguely couched laws that restrict of freedom of expression are incompatible with international standards that regulate restrictions on freedom of expression84 and can be misused in emergency situations to justify criminal defamation which intimidates people from speaking out especially journalists and other media practitioners. Provisions of such laws should be articulated with clarity. The over-criminalisation can potentially suppress dissemination of objective speech. While the main motive is to protect public health, approaches to control disinformation should be based on international human rights standards.85Over-criminalisation falls beyond the scope of what is necessary, reasonable and proportionate as decreed by international standards. In addition, the penalties are severe (up to 20 years in Zimbabwe). There is a possibility of being prosecuted even if reasonable steps had been taken to verify information if it turns out that the information is false. 86Consequently, the over-criminalisation and harsh penalties could result in self-censorship. Self-censorship will disadvantage the public who are in need of information that could help them comprehend the global crisis as it unfolds.87 The regulations seem to be spirited in muzzling alternative sources of information and social media promoting officialdom of news and information only from government departments and mainstream media. The regulation requires publication or dissemination information that has been authenticated and based on information from official sources. The COVID-19 pandemic is a new disease that everyone In Zimbabwe, while the ‘presumptive purpose’ of the regulation is to curb false information, what is actually prohibited is the “publication or communication of false news about any public officer, official or enforcement officer involved with enforcing or implementing the national 82 TF Hodgson et al ‘Southern Africa has cracked down on fake news, but may have gone too far’ https://mg.co.za/ article/2020-04-05-southern-africa-has-cracked-down-on-fake-news-but-may-have-gone-too-far/ 83 TF Hodgson et al as above. 84 Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and “Fake News”, Disinformation and Propaganda adopted in Vienna, on 3 March 2017 https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/6/8/302796.pdf 85 https://w w w.accessnow.org/cms/assets/uploads/2020/04/Fighting-misinformation-and-defending-free-expression-duringCOVID-19-recommendations-for-states-1.pdf 86 TF Hodgson et al n 55 above. 87 TF Hodgson et al ‘Southern Africa has cracked down on fake news, but may have gone too far’ https://mg.co.za/article/2020-04-05southern-africa-has-cracked-down-on-fake-news-but-may-have-gone-too-far/ (accessed 14 June 2020). https://zimbabwe.misa.org 20