By 
Zimbabwe’s telecommunications regulator, the Post and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe (POTRAZ), is advancing a controversial proposal that would require every mobile phone, not just SIM cards, to be registered in a new national database. The initiative seeks to collect and store International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) numbers, the unique identifiers assigned to mobile devices, in an effort to bolster cybersecurity, combat mobile fraud, and deter the use of stolen devices.
According to POTRAZ, the proposed system aims to enhance mobile transaction security, deter phone theft, and reinforce the fight against cybercrime. But while similar frameworks exist in countries such as Kenya and South Africa, the political climate in Zimbabwe is prompting deeper scrutiny over the true intent of this regulatory move.
Digital rights advocates and a growing number of Zimbabwean citizens argue that this initiative may go beyond combating financial crime or improving regulatory compliance. Critics fear it could become a powerful surveillance tool in the hands of a government already accused of infringing on digital freedoms.
The skepticism is rooted in Zimbabwe’s history of alleged state surveillance. Recent statements by ruling party officials claiming access to private WhatsApp messages—aired publicly on state-owned television—have only fueled public concerns. Though the veracity of those claims remains unverified, they underscore a broader narrative: government monitoring is not just possible, it is happening.
This mobile device registration plan is also reviving memories of past election cycles, when rumors spread that biometric voter data could be used to determine political allegiance. While these claims were unfounded, they had a chilling effect on voter behavior, raising fears that data privacy could be weaponized for political control.
From a compliance management perspective, the need for an entirely new national database is being questioned. Mobile network operators already collect IMEI data at the point of device registration or purchase. The proposed system appears duplicative, raising questions about data governance, regulatory transparency, and the actual necessity of centralizing this information at the state level.
With trust in government institutions already strained, the proposed measure risks deepening public distrust and could further undermine confidence in the digital regulatory environment. Privacy advocates argue that without strong internal controls, oversight mechanisms, and clear limitations on data use, the IMEI registry could erode digital rights and facilitate a surveillance state under the guise of cyber protection.
As the debate unfolds, the proposal is igniting important conversations around regulatory enforcement, compliance risk assessment, and the boundaries between national security and personal privacy. Whether the bill moves forward or not, it highlights the urgent need for regulatory frameworks that balance security imperatives with the preservation of civil liberties and digital autonomy.
Zimbabwe’s situation serves as a critical case study for other African nations navigating the complexities of digital transformation, surveillance technologies, and the governance of emerging tech infrastructures.
Comments