provisions of the Constitution. She also welcomed the fact that the current version of the draft Bill criminalises the transmission of intimate images and media without consent which is a breach of a person’s right to privacy. This is a welcome development because cases of sharing of intimate images without consent have previously been reported to the Police but none of these reports have led to any successful convictions.16 It should be noted that the current version of the draft Bill does not specifically criminalise “general” pornography, the draft Bill only gives a definition of what amounts to pornographic material. Pornography is however, criminalised under the Censorship and Entertainments Control Act [Chapter 10:04]. Other changes Jacqueline spoke about include those made to the criminal act of cyber-bullying and harassment; the current version of the draft Bill criminalises only the generation and communication of electronic communication which harasses another person. This is different from the first version of the draft Bill which only criminalised the initiation of electronic communication which harasses another person. The current draft Bill narrows down the number of incidents where investigating officers can ask for a citizen to assist them in the investigation of either a cybercrime or computer crime. During plenary, Otto raised the point that assistance can only be rendered with the consent of the court. Furthermore, the search and seizure provision has also been restricted in scope and is not as wide as it was in the first two versions of the draft Bill. In conclusion, Jacqueline argued that the 2017 version of the draft Bill had made strides towards respecting the spirit of the Zimbabwean Constitution but more still needed to be done to improve the draft Bill. She also applauded the drafters for taking into consideration some of the input and comments made by other stakeholders. Lastly, she stated that there was need to work on provisions which still permitted the use of keystroke loggers which are wrongly classified as forensic tools when in actual fact they are privacy breaching tools. 16 For example, the two former Miss Zimbabwe title holders who were stripped of their crowns after intimate images of them were released. In both instances police reports were allegedly made but to date there have been no arrests or convictions in either case. 23 Misa Zimbabwe Second Internet Governance Multi Stakeholder Conference 21 September 2017