Democracy without freedom of expression is like a body without a soul. Expressing the opinion and raising concerns and raising the questions before the government or institutions is the beauty of democracy. However, this freedom has been undermined by the PECA Act, which was passed in the name of regulating social media and countering fake news. The act has raised serious concerns, as it seems to be designed to silence citizens, control the narrative and suppress dissent, rather than protecting their rights. Moreover, critics say that the act undermines the country’s democracy. The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) was formerly enacted in 2016 to address cybercrimes in Pakistan. Over time, the government has introduced amendments to this act, with the most recent being the PECA Act 2025. This act was passed by the National Assembly on January 23, 2025, and subsequently approved by the Senate on January 28, 2025. The act introduces a criminal offense against those accused of spreading so-called false and fake information, imposing a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment along with a fine of up to two million rupees. The bill was introduced by the Federal Minister for Industries and Production, Rana Tanveer Hussain, and passed minutes after its introduction, as opposition members had already walked out of the session. Journalists also boycotted the assembly session in protest. The Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) has strongly opposed the act, rejecting it outright and announcing a strike against the law. Furthermore, the PECA act has been challenged in Lahore High Court, with petitioners arguing that the law has been misused in the past and the new penalties could further suppress freedom of expression. This law comes at a time when social media has become the last standing space where people can freely discuss political and social issues. Traditional media, under increasing pressure, has already lost its ability to report independently. Television channels are careful about what they broadcast, and newspapers avoid stories that could upset powerful institutions. As a result, the internet has become the primary platform for people to raise their concerns, highlight injustices, and demand change. However, the new amendment grants authorities the power to regulate online content in a way that can be used to suppress critical voices. Any post, video, or news article that challenges the official narrative could be labeled as false information and fake news, while the person sharing it could face legal consequences. In a democracy, people shouldn’t have to fear punishment just for sharing an opinion. Pakistan has a long history of silencing voices under the pretext of national security and social stability. For instance, during General Zia-ul-Haq’s dictatorship in the 1980s, journalists were arrested, newspapers were censored, and press freedom was nonexistent. Some writers like Faiz Ahmed Faiz and Habib Jalib were either jailed or forced into exile for their political views. The state tightly controlled information, ensuring that only one-sided, government-approved narratives reached the people. Today, the methods have changed, but the intent remains the same. Instead of banning newspapers, the authorities pressure media owners, block websites, and now, through the PECA amendment, can legally punish individuals for their opinions. The amendment may not openly call for censorship, but it provides legal cover to target journalists, political activists, and ordinary citizens who challenge the status quo. One of the law’s biggest problems lies in its vague language. It criminalizes the spread of false information, but who decides what is false? For example, a tweet by someone criticizing government policies, a YouTube video discussing corruption, or a Facebook post about human rights violations could all be classified as misinformation. This creates an environment where people will start second-guessing everything they post, fearing legal action. The chilling effect of such laws is far-reaching, it doesn’t just punish individuals; it discourages an entire society from speaking up. The power to regulate speech should never rest solely in the hands of those in power. This is not just a concern for journalists or activists. Every Pakistani who uses the internet will be affected. For example, imagine a student writing a post on social media about the struggles of unemployment or a citizen questioning government spending in an online discussion. If the authorities deem their words harmful or misleading, they could face serious consequences. In a democracy, people shouldn’t have to fear punishment just for sharing an opinion. However, with this amendment, only state-approved speech will be safe, and anything critical could disappear overnight. Furthermore, the human rights defenders who speak up about missing persons, minority issues, and women’s rights could be silenced with a simple label, anti-state and silenced. Additionally, the opposition politicians in the legislature could find their voices legally erased, just like in other countries where such laws have been used to crush dissent. Pakistan is not the first country to introduce such laws. Countries like China, Turkey, and Russia have introduced similar laws under the guise of fighting fake news, but their real purpose has been to crush dissent. In China, the government tightly controls the internet, ensuring that only positive portrayals of the state are visible. Journalists and activists who attempt to challenge this control often disappear or face long prison sentences. In Turkey, President Erdogan’s government has used disinformation laws to arrest journalists and opposition figures, making it one of the world’s worst jailers of Journalists. Russia’s government has made it illegal to criticize the war in Ukraine, with harsh punishments for those who spread false information. Pakistan, a country that has long struggled for democratic stability, now risks heading down a similar path. There is no doubt that fake news is a problem. Misinformation can be dangerous, causing panic, misleading the public, and even inciting violence. However, the solution is not to give the government unchecked power over what people can and cannot say. A more effective approach would be to strengthen independent fact-checking bodies, promote media literacy programs, and encourage responsible journalism. Governments should not have the authority to dictate the truth; in a democracy, truth should emerge through open debate and public discussion. When people start fearing that their words could lead to punishment, they begin to self-censor. The result is a silent society where only one version of reality is allowed to exist, the one approved by those in power. Pakistan has already witnessed growing restrictions on press freedom, increasing attacks on journalists, and state control over mainstream media. If digital platforms also fall under strict regulation, what remains of free speech? Democracy is not just about holding elections; it is about ensuring that people have a voice in shaping their nation’s future. Without the freedom to speak, question, and criticize, democracy turns into an illusion. Pakistan’s democratic journey has never been smooth. The country has faced military takeovers, political instability, and repeated attacks on press freedom. But despite these challenges, people have always fought to reclaim their rights. This amendment represents another test of Pakistan’s commitment to democracy. Will the people accept this quiet takeover of their freedoms, or will they resist? The answer to this question will define the country’s future. If history has taught us anything, it is that truth cannot be buried forever. No matter how hard those in power try to suppress it, it always finds a way to rise. The real challenge is whether the people of Pakistan are ready to defend it. The writer can be reached at mugherisaqibhussain@gmail.com.