SPECIAL COLLECTION OF THE CASE LAW ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
or regulation where the interest of consumers and their consumer and constitutional rights are threatened”.
ZICTA also consented to informing the public within 36 hours of any disruptions of the reason for that interruption. This judgement thus endorses the agreement between the two parties, Chapter One Foundation
(petitioner) and ZICTA (defendant). The legal action was triggered by the interruption of internet access
during the general elections of August 2021.
In the judgement of the case Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights v. Minister of State and National
Security, the Zimbabwean High Court held that an order to shut down internet services was unlawful and
ordered that all telecommunications service providers restore access to their subscribers. The Court held
that the applicable Interception of Communications Act was directly administered by the President and so
the Minister had no authority to issue an order under the law.
41
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents