Freedom on the Net 2025 - Zimbabwe

Partly Free
50
/ 100
Obstacles to Access 10 / 25
Limits on Content 22 / 35
Violations of User Rights 18 / 40
Last Year's Score & Status
48 / 100 Partly Free
Scores are based on a scale of 0 (least free) to 100 (most free). See the methodology and report acknowledgements.
Zimbabwe_hero_map
 

Key Developments, June 1, 2024 – May 31, 2025

Internet freedom in Zimbabwe improved slightly during the coverage period. While the penetration rate for mobile service increased, internet access continued to be hampered by infrastructure constraints, frequent electricity shortages, and high prices. Authorities persisted in their crackdown on expressions of political dissent online, and both journalists and ordinary users faced arrests, threats, and harassment for their online activity, particularly when they criticized the government.

  • Although internet access remained prohibitively expensive for many Zimbabweans, US-based Starlink’s satellite internet service, which became available in Zimbabwe in September 2024, offered more affordable pricing options than other internet service providers (ISPs).1 Starlink terminals sold out shortly after becoming available,2 and the company’s entry into the market forced other ISPs to reduce their prices in order to compete (A2 and A4).3
  • Amendments to the Broadcasting Services Act that were promulgated in May 2025 expanded the scope of the law to include digital media platforms and internet-based broadcasting services such as podcasts.4 The amendments also strengthened the president’s control over the Broadcasting Authority Board by removing a provision that had allowed for parliamentary consultation on the president’s board appointments (B6).
  • Several activists and journalists were arrested and detained for their online content as part of an ongoing crackdown on media freedom in Zimbabwe. In February 2025, Blessed Mhlanga, a journalist for the YouTube-based outlet Heart and Soul TV, was arrested and charged with inciting violence; the case centered on an interview in which a war veteran and former member of the ruling party called for President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s resignation.5 After being held for nearly three months, Mhlanga was granted provisional release, though he was still awaiting trial at the end of the coverage period. He faced up to three years in prison if convicted (C3).

Political Overview

The Zimbabwe African National Union–Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) has dominated Zimbabwean politics since independence in 1980 by carrying out severe crackdowns on the political opposition, critical media, and all sources of dissent. President Emmerson Mnangagwa took power in 2017 after the military intervened to remove longtime President Robert Mugabe amid factional divisions within the ruling party. Mnangagwa has largely retained the legal, administrative, and security architecture of the Mugabe era, and has consolidated his authority through acts of repression and a number of constitutional amendments. Endemic corruption, a vast patronage system, weak rule of law, and poor protections for workers and land rights remain critical challenges.

This report has been abridged for Freedom on the Net 2025 due to ongoing budget constraints. Please consider making a donation to support future editions of this vital resource.

For additional background information, see last year’s full report.

 
 

A Obstacles to Access

A1 0-6 pts
Do infrastructural limitations restrict access to the internet or the speed and quality of internet connections? 2 / 6

Score Change: The score improved from 1 to 2 due to increased mobile-service penetration,6 though electricity rationing and frequent power outages continued to disrupt people’s access to the internet.7

A2 0-3 pts
Is access to the internet prohibitively expensive or beyond the reach of certain segments of the population for geographical, social, or other reasons? 0 / 3
A3 0-6 pts
Does the government exercise technical or legal control over internet infrastructure for the purposes of restricting connectivity? 5 / 6
A4 0-6 pts
Are there legal, regulatory, or economic obstacles that restrict the diversity of service providers? 3 / 6
A5 0-4 pts
Do national regulatory bodies that oversee service providers and digital technology fail to operate in a free, fair, and independent manner? 0 / 4

B Limits on Content

B1 0-6 pts
Does the state block or filter, or compel service providers to block or filter, internet content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 6 / 6
B2 0-4 pts
Do state or nonstate actors employ legal, administrative, or other means to force publishers, content hosts, or digital platforms to delete content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 3 / 4
B3 0-4 pts
Do restrictions on the internet and digital content lack transparency, proportionality to the stated aims, or an independent appeals process? 2 / 4
B4 0-4 pts
Do online journalists, commentators, and ordinary users practice self-censorship? 2 / 4
B5 0-4 pts
Are online sources of information controlled or manipulated by the government or other powerful actors to advance a particular political interest? 2 / 4

Score Change: The score improved from 1 to 2 because the content manipulation observed during the August 2023 electoral cycle was not repeated during the coverage period.

B6 0-3 pts
Are there economic or regulatory constraints that negatively affect users’ ability to publish content online? 1 / 3
B7 0-4 pts
Does the online information landscape lack diversity and reliability? 3 / 4
B8 0-6 pts
Do conditions impede users’ ability to mobilize, form communities, and campaign, particularly on political and social issues? 3 / 6

C Violations of User Rights

C1 0-6 pts
Do the constitution or other laws fail to protect rights such as freedom of expression, access to information, and press freedom, including on the internet, and are they enforced by a judiciary that lacks independence? 2 / 6
C2 0-4 pts
Are there laws that assign criminal penalties or civil liability for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 1 / 4
C3 0-6 pts
Are individuals penalized for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 3 / 6
C4 0-4 pts
Does the government place restrictions on anonymous communication or encryption? 3 / 4
C5 0-6 pts
Does state surveillance of internet activities infringe on users’ right to privacy? 2 / 6
C6 0-6 pts
Does monitoring and collection of user data by service providers and other technology companies infringe on users’ right to privacy? 2 / 6
C7 0-5 pts
Are individuals subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor in relation to their online activities? 3 / 5
C8 0-3 pts
Are websites, governmental and private entities, service providers, or individual users subject to widespread hacking and other forms of cyberattack? 2 / 3

Footnotes