A/HRC/44/50/Add.2 (e) Section 13 allows police officers to disperse a gathering if the gathering is “unlawful by virtue of any prohibition notice or any direction or order under section 8” or if “any act is committed that constitutes a danger to persons and property”; (f) Section 15 allows a police officer to establish a cordon around any area if considered reasonably necessary to contain public disorder or violence within the area or protect the area from public disorder or public violence. Individuals who leave the cordoned area are guilty of an offence and liable to a fine, imprisonment or both; (g) Section 18 allows the Minister of Home Affairs and Cultural Heritage to request the President to authorize the Defence Forces to assist the police in suppressing any civil commotion or disturbance. 29. The Special Rapporteur notes that many of the restrictive provisions of the Public Order and Security Act are replicated in the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act with few exceptions, such as section 27 of the Public Order and Security Act, which was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe.11 30. The Special Rapporteur finds that the newly established legal framework does not address long-underlying concerns and is not conducive to free and unhindered exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, negatively affecting the exercise of the rights to freedom of association and expression. 31. The Special Rapporteur firmly believes that the exercise of this right should not be subjected to prior authorization by the regulating authority, including when it amounts to a de facto authorization as stipulated by section 7. At most, a prior notification requirement is sufficient to facilitate peaceful assemblies and demonstrations and to take measures to protect public safety and order and the rights and freedoms of others. Such a notification should be subject to a proportionality assessment, not unduly bureaucratic and be required a maximum of, for example, 48 hours prior to the day the assembly is planned to take place. The Special Rapporteur is of the opinion that notification should be required only for large assemblies or for assemblies where a certain degree of disruption is anticipated. 32. The Special Rapporteur notes that the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act does not protect spontaneous assemblies. Such a lack of protection is not considered to be a best practice in legislation on the right to freedom of assembly. Spontaneous assemblies should be recognized in law and exempted from prior notification, and simultaneous assemblies should be allowed, protected and facilitated, whenever possible. 33. In relation to the location of the assemblies, the Special Rapporteur considers that section 10 is intrusive in imposing prohibitions on the location of gatherings. He believes that spaces in the vicinity of iconic buildings, such as presidential palaces, parliaments or memorials, should also be considered public spaces, and peaceful assemblies should be allowed to take place in those locations. Any imposition of restrictions on venue, time and manner should meet the test of necessity and proportionality. 34. While the Special Rapporteur acknowledges that organizers should make reasonable efforts to comply with the law and to encourage the peaceful conduct of an assembly, organizers should not be held responsible for the unlawful behaviour of others. To do so would violate the principle of individual liability, weaken trust and cooperation among assembly organizers, participants and the authorities, and discourage potential assembly organizers from exercising their rights. The Special Rapporteur stresses that no person should be held criminally, civilly or administratively liable for the mere act of organizing or participating in a peaceful protest. 35. The Special Rapporteur opposes provisions related to containment or cordoning an area and underscores the utmost importance of genuine dialogue, including through negotiation, between law enforcement authorities and organizers in order to ensure the smooth conduct of a public assembly. 11 6 See Democratic Assembly for Restoration and Empowerment and 3 Others v. Saunyama N.O and 3 Others (CCZ 9/18, Civil Appeal No. CCZ 5/18) [2018] ZWCC 9), 17 October 2018.