Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) said the bill’s provisions are “vague, lack certainty, are imprecise, and are thus prone to abuse by law enforcement”.
“The bill does not define ‘sovereignty’ and ‘national interest’, which could be interpreted broadly and subjectively to criminalise the legitimate conduct of those asserting their freedom of expression,” the organisation said in a statement.
“ZLHR is gravely concerned that the bill penalises citizens and residents for merely attending a meeting where sanctions are considered, whether the sanctions target any individual or official or class of individuals.
“The vague criminalisation of meetings between Zimbabwean citizens and foreign governments violates human rights to freedom of assembly, association and expression guaranteed in the constitution. Zimbabwe has also voluntarily agreed to be bound by numerous UN and AU human rights instruments providing these rights.”
Human rights lawyer Siphosami Malunga questioned the definition of patriotism, saying criticising the government could in fact be a patriotic act, borne out of love for the country.
The Zimbabwean government has a long history of silencing critics. In April, Jacob Ngarivhume, leader of the Transform Zimbabwe party, was sentenced to four years in prison on public violence incitement charges stemming from a July 2020 tweet in which he called for a national shutdown.
Opposition lawmaker Job Sikhala, who was held in a maximum-security prison for more than a year, was convicted in May of obstructing justice.