Online oppression
Editorial Published December 4, 2024
THE government appears to be on some sort of mission to create regulatory bodies and introduce
amendments to laws.
Its recent plan to bring changes to Peca 2016, including the establishment of a new Digital Rights
Protection Authority, shows how the state continues to prioritise control over real cybersecurity
concerns. There is no mistaking it. It is simply another attempt to suffocate dissent. This is not the first
time Peca has been weaponised against free speech.
Since its inception in 2016, the law has faced persistent criticism from journalists, CSOs, and digital rights
advocates for its vague provisions that enable state overreach. The 2022 Peca ordinance, later struck
down by the Islamabad High Court, had similarly attempted to criminalise criticism of public officials.
Now, we see history repeating itself with even more draconian measures.
The proposed amendments are particularly troubling in their expansive definition of ‘social media
platforms’ to include tools used to access such platforms. With the government without a legal cover to
block VPNs, it is a not-so-thinly veiled attempt to regulate them. And while misinformation is a real issue,
its vague definition under the proposed law raises critical concerns. What qualifies as ‘fake or false
information’? Who decides its authenticity?
This, coupled with ‘fake news’ carrying five-year imprisonment terms, creates an environment of fear
and self-censorship. The irony should not be lost on anyone: as traditional media faces increasing curbs
and economic pressures, citizens naturally turn to social media for information and expression. Instead
of addressing the root causes of misinformation by fostering media literacy and protecting press
freedom, the state’s response is to create yet another regulatory body with sweeping powers to block
content and prosecute citizens.
The creation of DRPA, following the uncertain fate of the recently established National Cyber Crime &
Investigation Authority, reflects a bureaucratic tendency to multiply institutions rather than strengthen
existing ones. The NCCIA, formed just months ago to replace the FIA’s Cybercrime Wing, already appears
to be in limbo with its governing rules repealed. This pattern of creating overlapping bodies while failing
to address fundamental issues of digital rights and cybersecurity does not inspire confidence.
The state must realise: the more it clamps down on legitimate discourse, the more it fosters a climate of
rumour-mongering and conspiracy theories. When citizens cannot trust traditional media due to state
interference and find themselves muzzled online, social media platforms become fertile ground for
unverified narratives. This fuels the very chaos the government claims it seeks to prevent.
Rather than heavy-handed measures, the government should foster a culture of open dialogue.
Empower citizens to discern fact from fiction, hold social media platforms accountable through fair
regulation, and rebuild trust in traditional media by ensuring its independence.
• Dissent - ( )اختالف- disagreement or opposition to authority.
• Inception - ( )آغاز- the beginning or start of something.
• Draconian - ( )سخت گیر- excessively harsh or severe.
• Expansive - ( )وسیع- broad or comprehensive in scope.
• Authenticity - ( )مستند ہونا- the quality of being genuine or true.
• Rumour-mongering - ( )افواہ سازی- spreading unverified or false information.
