South Africa Forces Meta to Comply. What That Means for Zimbabwe

South Africa just scored a major legal victory that many countries, including Zimbabwe, would be jealous of. A court there has compelled Meta, the tech giant that owns WhatsApp and Instagram, to hand over subscriber information tied to accounts that posted explicit content of school children.

This is huge.

Meta, like most international tech platforms, usually hides user data behind global policy loopholes, jurisdiction arguments, and the default setting of “not our problem.” But this ruling proves that local laws and court orders can still cut through that.

It’s a win for the South African legal system and some are saying it sends a strong message to tech companies: if you operate here, you play by our rules.

The good side of this power

We know how the internet is the Wild West. On it is everything from free expression and activism to abuse and crime. Remember that whole Levels/Shashl debacle.

So when people are sharing illegal content or harassing others online, it makes sense that governments should have the tools to go after them.

That’s what South Africa is doing here. The authorities aren’t asking for crazy surveillance powers. They’re going through the courts, getting lawful orders, and demanding accountability. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

The fact that a South African court could force a Big Tech giant like Meta to comply means their legal system has teeth. That’s great news.

Now imagine this power in Zimbabwe’s hands

Here’s where it gets uncomfortable.

If the Zimbabwean government were to gain this kind of legal power, where it could force international tech companies to reveal identities of anonymous users, the big question is: how would that power be used?

Let’s be honest. We don’t have the best track record.

In South Africa, the court order was about protecting children and punishing criminals. In Zimbabwe, it’s hard not to imagine such tools being used to go after people who simply express political opinions that don’t align with the ruling party.

Some of the most impactful civic action in Zimbabwe has come from anonymous accounts. Think of the Twitter/X accounts or old Facebook accounts that exposed corruption, organised protests, or simply gave citizens a voice to express frustration.

If Meta or Google started handing over IP addresses and phone numbers because of local court orders, it’s easy to see how that could go wrong, fast.

Anonymity is a weird thing

It’s a complicated picture. Being anonymous online can empower criminals and abusers, yes. But in places where freedom after expression is not guaranteed, it can also be an important thing.

That’s the balance Zimbabwe would have to strike, if we ever get to the point where we have the legal and diplomatic muscle to demand compliance from tech giants in the first place.

And truth be told, we’re nowhere near that.

Our legal institutions don’t inspire confidence, and international platforms know this. That’s partly why Zimbabwean court orders (when they exist at all) don’t carry much weight beyond our borders.

It’s not that companies like Meta have any moral high ground,they just know they can get away with ignoring us. And that’s messed up, if we’re being honest.

These companies shouldn’t be able to just look straight into our little brown eyes and laugh at our attempts to run a country with its own laws. However, that’s exactly where we are and it’s a shame but in some contexts, a blessing.

So what can Zimbabwe learn from this. The conversations I’ve had led me to boil it down to these three things:

• Build trust in institutions. If we want to hold tech companies accountable, we have to start by cleaning up our own legal systems. Stuff like the Blessed Mhlanga case works against us.
• Properly protect free speech. Any power to unmask online users must come with strong checks and balances.
• Working as a region. Maybe SADC countries could negotiate with big tech as a bloc. Alone, we’re too easy to ignore.

Until then, we’ll watch from the sidelines as South Africa flexes legal muscle we can only dream of. And maybe that’s not a bad thing, for now. Internet anonymity might be the only shield some Zimbabweans have.