The possibility of the inclusion of mobile phones in this definition is based on the fact that mobile phones, by their nature, can reproduce data. The unauthorised access to data on computer data storage mediums is criminalised in terms of Section 6 (1) of the Bill. Section 9, on the other hand, criminalises the unlawful interference of data kept on a computer data storage medium. Such unlawful interference can be in the form of altering, damaging, or deleting the data without lawful consent. These are all welcome safeguards meant to ensure the integrity of data stored on all forms of computer data storage mediums. It must be noted, however, that the wide net cast in this definition causes potential problems when viewed against Section 33 of the Bill which regulates search and seizure procedures for the process of investigating cyber crime. In Section 33 (1)(b), computer data storage mediums are listed as equipment that can be seized in terms of the Act. This means that while investigating a cyber crime, investigating authorities can seize computer devices, including mobile phones, even if there is no evidence that the mobile phones have been plugged into any computer devices belonging to the person(s) under investigation. There are already, instances where the Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) Criminal Investigations Department, has seized mobile devices during investigations. For example, during investigations in the Martha O’Donovan case in November 2017, investigating officers seized her mobile phone along with her laptop. A wide definition of computer data storage mediums will make it possible for investigating officers to seize any electronic equipment, including equipment which is not directly involved in the criminal activity being investigated. This is a major privacy concern because investigating officers will have the discretion to decide which electronic equipment to grab during cyber criminal investigations. 2