Why Me to Face Trial Despite Foreign Offence – Court Rules

Why Me to Face Trial Despite Foreign Offence – Court Rules

By Hannock Kasama

LUSAKA – The Lusaka Magistrates Court has ruled that it has jurisdiction to hear the case involving Francis Kapwepwe, widely known as “Why Me”, who faces charges of hate speech, even though the alleged offence was committed outside Zambia.

Summary: Lusaka Magistrate Idah Phiri has ruled that the court can proceed with the hate speech trial of social media influencer Francis “Why Me” Kapwepwe, citing Section 6 of the Penal Code and Section 65 of the Cyber Security and Cyber Crimes Act, despite the alleged offence occurring abroad.

⚖️ Court Confirms Its Jurisdiction

Delivering the ruling, Resident Magistrate Idah Phiri emphasized that the Zambian courts have jurisdiction to try Why Me because the alleged act had a connection to Zambia’s public peace and order, even if executed outside the country.

She referred to Section 6 of the Penal Code, Chapter 87, which states that an individual who commits an offence outside Zambia can still be tried within the country if the crime has a direct or indirect effect on Zambian citizens or interests.

Magistrate Phiri also invoked Section 65 of the Cyber Security and Cyber Crimes Act, which gives Zambian authorities power to prosecute online offences committed by citizens or residents abroad, as long as the offence affects Zambian cyberspace or targets Zambian individuals or groups.

“The court has jurisdiction to handle this matter under the provisions of the law, as the alleged offence, though committed outside the borders, bears consequences within Zambia,” Magistrate Phiri stated.

🧑‍⚖️ Defence Argument Rejected

The defence team representing Francis Kapwepwe (29) had earlier contended that their client could not be tried within Zambia, claiming that his online posts were made while he was outside the country and therefore beyond Zambian legal reach.

However, the prosecution successfully argued that Why Me’s content, though shared abroad, was directed at Zambian audiences and caused public outrage locally.

Legal analysts say this interpretation aligns with Zambia’s evolving approach to cyber jurisdiction, where the focus is not only on where a statement is made but also on who it affects.

🧾 Charges Against ‘Why Me’

Kapwepwe is charged with hate speech — specifically for expressing hatred, ridicule, or contempt toward individuals based on race, tribe, place of origin, or colour.

Authorities allege that the accused made remarks on social media that were divisive and ethnically provocative, violating Zambia’s commitment to peace and unity under the law.

The charge falls under provisions of both the Penal Code and the Cyber Security and Cyber Crimes Act, which together criminalize content that promotes hostility, discrimination, or incitement against any group.

If convicted, Why Me could face a substantial fine or imprisonment, as provided under the cyber laws enacted to curb online hate and digital harassment.

💬 Legal Experts Weigh In

Prominent legal commentator Mr. Isaac Mwansa, speaking to The Daily Observer, said the ruling reinforces the idea that cyberspace has no borders in the eyes of the law.

“The court’s decision demonstrates that digital misconduct, even when committed abroad, can still be prosecuted if it impacts people at home. This sets a very clear precedent for future cases,” Mwansa said.

He added that Zambia’s Cyber Security and Cyber Crimes Act, enacted to promote responsible digital behaviour, is now becoming an important tool for tackling cross-border offences such as online defamation, hate speech, and cyberbullying.

Another legal analyst, Charity Zulu, noted that while freedom of expression is a constitutional right, it must not infringe on the dignity and safety of others.

“The challenge now is balancing free speech with accountability. Courts must ensure justice without stifling legitimate criticism or public discourse,” she explained.

🌍 The Broader Context: Cyber Law in Zambia

Zambia has strengthened its cyber legislation in recent years to respond to the growing misuse of social media and digital platforms.

The Cyber Security and Cyber Crimes Act of 2021 expanded legal tools available to prosecutors, allowing courts to handle offences committed online — including hate speech, identity theft, and cyber fraud — whether the offender is within or outside the country.

Experts believe the Why Me case will serve as a landmark ruling that could guide how transnational cyber offences are prosecuted in the future, especially in an era where social media influence crosses borders within seconds.

📱 Public and Online Reactions

The ruling has stirred intense debate on social media, with fans of Why Me voicing mixed feelings.

Some supporters argue that the case represents a targeted attack on free speech, while others believe the influencer must face justice for promoting ethnic division online.

On X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook, several users expressed that this judgment should serve as a warning to online content creators who use their platforms irresponsibly.

One post read:

“Freedom of speech is not freedom to insult others based on tribe or race. The law must take its course.”

Meanwhile, human rights groups have urged the judiciary to handle the case fairly, ensuring both accountability and due process.

🧩 What Happens Next

With jurisdiction now settled, the case will proceed to trial in the Lusaka Magistrates Court, where prosecutors are expected to present digital evidence, including screenshots, recordings, and forensic data tracing the origin of the alleged posts.

Legal observers expect the trial to attract significant public interest as it tests the practical limits of Zambia’s cybercrime legislation.

📰 Why This Case Matters

The Why Me case underscores how the Zambian judiciary is adapting to modern digital realities, where online actions can carry real-world consequences.

It also highlights the government’s growing focus on cyber accountability — ensuring that citizens use digital platforms responsibly, regardless of where they are.

This decision could shape how future cases involving social media misconduct are handled, especially those involving influencers or public figures whose content reaches large audiences across borders.

✅ Conclusion

The court’s decision to proceed with Why Me’s trial sends a strong message that no one is beyond the reach of the law, even in cyberspace.

As the trial moves forward, all eyes will be on how the evidence unfolds — and whether this ruling becomes a defining moment for Zambia’s digital justice system.

For now, the message is clear: online behaviour carries legal weight, and the internet is no longer a safe haven for impunity.

Credit: Kalemba