Human Rights Gaps in Zambia’s Correctional Legal and Policy Framework: A Critical Analysis of the Zambia Correctional Service Act No. 37 of 2021

This study critically examines human rights gaps within Zambia’s correctional legal and policy framework, with particular focus on the Zambia Correctional Service Act No. 37 of 2021. The study is grounded in a qualitative doctrinal research approach, relying on systematic document analysis of national legislation and international human rights instruments, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules).
The general objective was to assess the extent to which Zambia’s correctional legal framework aligns with international human rights standards and effectively protects the rights of persons deprived of liberty. Specifically, the study examined alignment with international standards, analysed key human rights provisions, identified legal and policy gaps, assessed governance and accountability mechanisms, and evaluated the protection of specific human rights within correctional settings.
The findings reveal that the Act reflects a progressive shift toward a rights-based and rehabilitative correctional system, incorporating principles such as dignity, humane treatment, and reintegration. However, the alignment with international standards remains partial. The study identifies significant gaps, including lack of explicit human rights guarantees, absence of detailed and enforceable standards for detention conditions, weak accountability and oversight mechanisms, and limited protection for vulnerable groups.
The study concludes that while the Act establishes a strong normative framework, it lacks the legal specificity and institutional mechanisms necessary for effective human rights protection. It recommends the introduction of explicit rights-based provisions, strengthening of oversight systems, and development of enforceable standards to enhance compliance with international human rights obligations.

Correctional System; Human Rights

1. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Drew, N., Funk, M., Tang, S., Lamichhane, J., Chávez, E., Katontoka, S., Pathare, S., Lewis, O., Gostin, L., Saraceno, B., & Saxena, S. (2011). Human rights violations of people with mental and psychosocial disabilities: An unresolved global crisis. The Lancet, 378(9803), 1664–1675. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61458-X [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Gostin, L. O., & Gable, L. (2004). The human rights of persons with mental disabilities: A global perspective on the application of human rights principles to mental health. Maryland Law Review, 63(1), 20–121. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Hamaundu, F. M. (2013). Community service as an alternative to custodial sentences in Zambia. University of Zambia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Hutchinson, T., & Duncan, N. (2012). Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal research. Deakin Law Review, 17(1), 83–119. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Mwanandiwa, B. (2013). The rights of prisoners and prison conditions in Zambia. University of Zambia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Prison Audit Report. (2023). Assessment of correctional centres and human rights compliance in Zambia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Republic of Zambia. (1965). Prisons Act (Chapter 97 of the Laws of Zambia). Lusaka: Government Printer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Republic of Zambia. (2021). Zambia Correctional Service Act No. 37 of 2021. Lusaka: Government Printer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. New York: United Nations. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. New York: United Nations. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2015). United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules). Vienna: UNODC. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. World Health Organization. (2021). Guidance on community mental health services: Promoting person-centred and rights-based approaches. Geneva: WHO. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Conflict of Law in the Safeguarding of Malaysian Intangible Cultural Heritage: A Way Forward
• Alternative Dispute Resolution in India: A Brief Overview Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. - William E. Gladstone
• The Role of Museums in Safeguarding Cultural Heritage Rights: Balancing Access and Repatriation
• An Evaluation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' Significance and Application in Nigeria
• The Role of International Law in Shaping National Immigration Policies.