ARTICLE 19 condemns the Zambian authorities’ decision to cancel, under the guise of ‘postponement’, the global digital rights conference RightsCon 2026, scheduled to take place alongside the annual UNESCO World Press Freedom Day Global Conference in Lusaka next week.
The Zambian government’s action raises serious concerns for human rights, especially the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Under international human rights law, restrictions on these rights must be strictly necessary, proportionate, and based on specific legitimate aims – not on disagreement with the topics discussed or the identity of participants.
We express our solidarity with the conference organisers, Access Now, who have worked incredibly hard to convene this gathering, as well as with all participants who made significant efforts to collectively shape the programme and who spent their limited resources to attend the conference in person. With the Zambian government’s decision, they were prevented from exercising their rights to freedom of expression and assembly.
According to information provided by the Ministry of Information and Media, ‘the decision was made to allow for comprehensive disclosure of key issues expected to be discussed at the global event’ and to ensure the event ‘aligns with Zambia’s national values, policy priorities, and broader public interest.’
We are aware of claims, many of them well-founded, that pressure from foreign governments contributed to the Zambian government’s decision.
On 1 May, Access Now released a follow-up statement acknowledging that diplomats from the People’s Republic of China had put pressure on the Government of Zambia regarding in-person participation from Taiwanese civil society at RightsCon. Access Now said they found news of the pressure ‘extremely concerning’ and ‘immediately pushed back’, thinking they would be able to address the issue with the government. The situation escalated from there. ARTICLE 19 is appalled by this escalation in transnational repression, which not only targets Taiwanese civil society but also affects the global rights community at large.
Regardless of the reasons for this action, in preventing a global event on digital rights, the government made it clear to international partners, journalists, civil society actors, academics, and human rights defenders that legitimate debate in the country will be curtailed when it is deemed inconvenient.
In this context, we also find it concerning that the World Press Freedom Day (WPFD) Global Conference is scheduled to go ahead, subject to security vetting of all participants, with a requirement that this vetting be completed within 48 hours.
The events were intended to be complementary. Preventing one from taking place fundamentally undermines the integrity of the other. It also legitimises the very practices – such as exclusion, vetting, and control over viewpoints – that these gatherings are meant to challenge.
International forums conditioned on political comfort or selective participation normalise the restriction of civic space and erode trust in global commitments to freedom of expression, human rights, and collaboration.
We call on Zambia to demonstrate that its stated commitments to human rights go beyond rhetoric and are reflected in its treatment of civil society, journalists, and global partners. Credible defence of press freedom requires consistency in both words and actions.
We also call on UNESCO and participating states in the WPFD conference to address this situation publicly and unequivocally. Celebrating press freedom in this context implicitly endorses restrictions on who can participate and what can be discussed.
We call on the government of Zambia to guarantee that those who attend UNESCO WPFD Global Conference in Lusaka will be safe and able to speak freely. Further, we call on all governments that decide to participate in the events to use their presence to actively speak out against restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly in Zambia and refuse to legitimise practices that curtail civic space. Engagement in such forums must not come at the expense of the principles they are meant to defend.
For ARTICLE 19, the cancellation of RightsCon 2026 is about so much more than the disruption of meetings and workshops. What is at stake is the principle that spaces for global dialogue must be open, independent, and free from political interference. The decisions taken by the Zambian government signal a direct threat to this principle and an undermining of freedom of expression and assembly.