Opinion / Columnist
The new Broadcasting Services Amendment Act: A legal analysis
31 May 2025 at 14:06hrs | Views
The Broadcasting Services Amendment Act No.2, 2025 (Hereinafter referred to as the Act/ Amendment Act) represents a significant shift in Zimbabwe's media regulation landscape. Promulgated as part of broader media law reforms, the amendment aims to align the Broadcasting Services Act [Chapter 12:06] with constitutional principles, technological advancements and regional best practices.
However, while the Act introduces commendable improvements, it also raises substantial concerns regarding media independence, digital rights and regulatory integrity.
One of the most notable improvements is the formal recognition of online broadcasting services and digital platforms.
The Amendment marks an important step in modernising Zimbabwe's media regulation by formally recognising internet-based broadcasting such as podcast, streaming platforms and social media live streams.
This is a timely and progressive reform, considering that audience habits have shifted dramatically toward digital content consumption.
By acknowledging the role of online platforms, the Amendment Act attempts to align Zimbabwe's media law with 21st century realities, where traditional radio and television are no longer the sole or even primary sources of information for many, especially the youth.
This recognition potentially creates space for digital content creators, entrepreneurial media start-ups and community-driven online platforms to operate within a regulated environment.
It may also encourage foreign investment and technological innovation in the media space, particularly if it enables licensing frameworks that are fair, transparent and inclusive.
However, this alignment is not without risks. While the Act seeks to align with internet and technological developments, it went about it the wrong way by failing to provide a clear and narrow definition of what constitutes internet broadcasting service.
This vagueness opens the door to regulatory overreach, where citizen journalists, bloggers and even social media users could be subjected to licensing requirements meant for large scale broadcasters.
The potential for selective enforcement is high especially in politically sensitive periods such as elections, turning what should be for protective measure into a tool for digital censorship and surveillance.
Therefore, internet-based broadcasting must be anchored in robust safeguards that ensure digital rights, freedom of expression and non-discriminatory regulation.
Without these, the modernisation risks becoming a digital leash, rather than a progressive leap forward.
The Amendment Act makes a notable attempt to diversify Zimbabwe's broadcasting landscape by expanding the categories of services recognised under law.
In addition to traditional formats such as public, commercial and community broadcasting, the Act now formally includes subscription management services, internet-based broadcasting, webcasting, satellite uplinks and datacasting services.
This is a progressive development that reflects the changing nature of global media, where convergence between telecoms, broadcasting and digital content platforms is increasingly becoming the norm.
By formally acknowledging these new categories, the Act opens the door for new entrants, especially in the digital and pay-TV sectors, and provides legal recognition for content distributed online.
This could stimulate competition, technological innovation and audience choice, while also giving a regulatory identity to previously grey areas of media activity such as podcasting and over-the-top services.
It is also commendable that community broadcasting remains prioritised with clearer licensing and funding support mechanisms introduced to enhance linguistic and cultural inclusion, especially in rural and underrepresented communities.
The Amendment Act makes a modest but important attempt to enhance women's representation in media governance structures.
Specifically, the Act mandates that at least three of the seven Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe (BAZ) board members be women.
While this quota signals progress, its impact will depend heavily on implementation, transparency in selection processes and whether these appointment translate into real influence over policy decisions.
Meaningful representation goes beyond numbers, it requires creating space for women's voices in content creation, regulation and media leadership.
On the other hand, the promotion of community broadcasting services marks a potentially transformative step for inclusive media.
The Act provides for a licensing framework that encourages grassroots participation, particularly by marginalised and rural communities.
The Amendment Act also states that community broadcasters must predominantly use languages spoken by their target community and ensure community participation in content creation and station governance.
One of the most glaring flaws in the Amendment Act is the continued lack of institutional independence of the BAZ.
While the Act claims to improve regulatory transparency and promote democratic media governance, Section 4 entrenches executive dominance by giving the President sole power to appoint all members of the BAZ Board, merely "after consultation" with the minister and the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders.
This language is intentionally weak.
However, while the Act introduces commendable improvements, it also raises substantial concerns regarding media independence, digital rights and regulatory integrity.
One of the most notable improvements is the formal recognition of online broadcasting services and digital platforms.
The Amendment marks an important step in modernising Zimbabwe's media regulation by formally recognising internet-based broadcasting such as podcast, streaming platforms and social media live streams.
This is a timely and progressive reform, considering that audience habits have shifted dramatically toward digital content consumption.
By acknowledging the role of online platforms, the Amendment Act attempts to align Zimbabwe's media law with 21st century realities, where traditional radio and television are no longer the sole or even primary sources of information for many, especially the youth.
This recognition potentially creates space for digital content creators, entrepreneurial media start-ups and community-driven online platforms to operate within a regulated environment.
It may also encourage foreign investment and technological innovation in the media space, particularly if it enables licensing frameworks that are fair, transparent and inclusive.
However, this alignment is not without risks. While the Act seeks to align with internet and technological developments, it went about it the wrong way by failing to provide a clear and narrow definition of what constitutes internet broadcasting service.
This vagueness opens the door to regulatory overreach, where citizen journalists, bloggers and even social media users could be subjected to licensing requirements meant for large scale broadcasters.
The potential for selective enforcement is high especially in politically sensitive periods such as elections, turning what should be for protective measure into a tool for digital censorship and surveillance.
Therefore, internet-based broadcasting must be anchored in robust safeguards that ensure digital rights, freedom of expression and non-discriminatory regulation.
Without these, the modernisation risks becoming a digital leash, rather than a progressive leap forward.
The Amendment Act makes a notable attempt to diversify Zimbabwe's broadcasting landscape by expanding the categories of services recognised under law.
This is a progressive development that reflects the changing nature of global media, where convergence between telecoms, broadcasting and digital content platforms is increasingly becoming the norm.
By formally acknowledging these new categories, the Act opens the door for new entrants, especially in the digital and pay-TV sectors, and provides legal recognition for content distributed online.
This could stimulate competition, technological innovation and audience choice, while also giving a regulatory identity to previously grey areas of media activity such as podcasting and over-the-top services.
It is also commendable that community broadcasting remains prioritised with clearer licensing and funding support mechanisms introduced to enhance linguistic and cultural inclusion, especially in rural and underrepresented communities.
The Amendment Act makes a modest but important attempt to enhance women's representation in media governance structures.
Specifically, the Act mandates that at least three of the seven Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe (BAZ) board members be women.
While this quota signals progress, its impact will depend heavily on implementation, transparency in selection processes and whether these appointment translate into real influence over policy decisions.
Meaningful representation goes beyond numbers, it requires creating space for women's voices in content creation, regulation and media leadership.
On the other hand, the promotion of community broadcasting services marks a potentially transformative step for inclusive media.
The Act provides for a licensing framework that encourages grassroots participation, particularly by marginalised and rural communities.
The Amendment Act also states that community broadcasters must predominantly use languages spoken by their target community and ensure community participation in content creation and station governance.
One of the most glaring flaws in the Amendment Act is the continued lack of institutional independence of the BAZ.
While the Act claims to improve regulatory transparency and promote democratic media governance, Section 4 entrenches executive dominance by giving the President sole power to appoint all members of the BAZ Board, merely "after consultation" with the minister and the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders.
This language is intentionally weak.
Source - NewsDay
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
