Daily Times

Should the government have the power to erase your online speech within 24 hours-without judicial oversight?

This is the fundamental question at the heart of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act, 2025 (PECA 2025). While the framers cited it as a necessary response to counter cybercrimes and misinformation, as the state cannot allow individuals to tarnish reputations for a few dollars. However, critics argue that it hands unchecked power to the state, threatening press freedom, political dissent, and individual privacy by enabling unchecked state surveillance over social media platforms.

Pakistan’s digital landscape is evolving rapidly, with social media becoming a powerful tool for political activism, journalism, and public discourse. However, it has also become a battleground for disinformation, cyber harassment, and online fraud. In response, the government has amended the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (PECA) to tighten regulations, enhance cybersecurity, and ensure greater state control over digital spaces.

But at what cost?

Key Provisions: A Double-Edged Sword

* National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) – A new agency replacing the FIA Cyber Crime Cell, tasked with tackling cyber offenses with a dedicated Forensic Laboratory.

Now that PECA has been enacted, its impact will largely depend on how the executive implements it and how the judiciary interprets its provisions.

* Establishment of Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority – Empowered to monitor and regulate digital platforms.

* Section 26A – Criminalizes the intentional dissemination of misinformation, expanding the definitions of cyber harassment and defamation.

* Content Removal Powers – Authorities can take down any content they deem illegal or inappropriate within 24 hours-without judicial approval.

Censorship or Cybersecurity? The Case Against PECA 2025

PECA 2025 is being positioned as a shield against digital threats, but in reality, it could become a sword wielded against dissenting voices. The most alarming provision is Section 2R, which grants government appointed authority the power to suspend or block online speech under the following conditions:”:

* Content deemed against the ideology of Pakistan

The term ‘ideology of Pakistan’ is not defined in the Act, leaving it open to interpretation. This vagueness grants the government unchecked power to label opposing speech as a threat to national ideology.

* Section 2R(1)(g): The ‘False Information’ Clause

Grants authorities the power to declare content “false” and remove it immediately. No right of appeal for the content creator. Risk: Political figures, journalists, and activists could be silenced without due process.

* Section 2R(1)(h): The ‘Aspersion’ Expansion

Broadens defamation laws to include criticism of state institutions. Risk: Criminalizing criticism of government agencies creates ‘untouchables’ that cannot be held accountable in future as no one can raise their voice against corruption or misconduct/mismanagement by the institutions.

* Section 2R(2): The Assembly Speech Blackout

Bans media from reporting and streaming online on expunged parliamentary statements. Contradiction: Directly violates Article 19A of the Constitution of Pakistan, which guarantees the right to information.

Real-World Implications: A Dangerous Precedent?

If history is any guide, similar laws elsewhere have led to outright censorship.

* In Turkey, the government’s disinformation law led to mass removals of critical news articles and social media posts. Journalists were arrested under broad interpretations of ‘fake news.’

* In India, new IT rules have given authorities the power to demand takedowns of posts critical of the government. Several news outlets have faced censorship and legal action.

* In Russia, cyber laws have been used to silence independent media under the guise of ‘national security.’

The Constitutional and International Law Challenge

From a legal standpoint, PECA 2025 stands on shaky constitutional ground. Article 19 of the Constitution of Pakistan guarantees freedom of speech, yet PECA 2025 introduces vague restrictions that exceed permissible limitations. Article 14, which guarantees privacy and human dignity, is contradicted by state surveillance provisions within the law.

Additionally, Pakistan is a signatory to both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which emphasize the right to privacy (Article 17 of the ICCPR) and freedom of expression (Article 19 of the UDHR and ICCPR).

According to the UN Human Rights Committee, any restrictions on online speech must adhere to the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality – criteria that PECA 2025 fails to fully meet. Similarly, under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), strict safeguards against state censorship are enforced, ensuring that content removals are subject to judicial oversight. In Germany, the Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) mandates due process in content moderation, requiring that any intervention by the state follows clear procedural safeguards – standards that PECA 2025 fails to meet.

What Must Be Done? A Roadmap for Reform

* Clarify Legal Definitions – Terms like ‘misinformation’, ‘ideology of Pakistan’ ‘aspersion’, and ‘false content’ must be precisely defined to prevent abuse.

* Ensure Judicial Oversight – No content should be removed/blocked without court approval to prevent state overreach.

* Protect Journalists and Free Speech – Fair Criticism of public officials and state institutions should not be criminalized.

* Adopt Proportionate Penalties – Instead of harsh criminal penalties, fines or community service should be imposed for non-violent digital speech violations.

* Independent Oversight of the Regulatory Authority – The Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority should not operate as a government-controlled body but should have independent oversight.

Conclusion: The Fight for Digital Freedoms.

PECA 2025 is being positioned as a crucial law for national security, but its current provisions risk transforming Pakistan’s digital space into a controlled and censored environment. If left unchecked, it could be weaponized to suppress political dissent, silence journalists, and curtail citizens’ right to free speech.

Much is at stake with this law. Its enforcement will shape the country’s trajectory in profound ways. Now that it has been enacted, its impact will largely depend on how the executive implements it and how the judiciary interprets its provisions. Previously, Pakistan’s apex court struck down amendments to PECA 2016. The latest amendments have also been challenged before Supreme Court as well as before the High Courts. Now, it is up to the judiciary to determine their fate. Equally important will be the signals Pakistan’s political leadership sends.

The question remains: Will Pakistan embrace digital progress with freedom, or will it succumb to the fear of open expression?

The writer is a lawyer and works as Assistant District Attorney, Sheikhupura.