Pakistan’s digital rights remain hostage to the same political charades that allowed Pica to flourish in the first place.
Ten years ago, in 2015, First draft The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), 2016, came into force. But not because the government – then the Muslim League (N) too – felt the need for transparency, collaboration and consultation. It was a leaked draft that was analyzed and shared.
The draft immediately sparked alarm among digital rights activists, who held a press conference in Islamabad to warn of the bill’s troubling implications. Still, the mood in the room was dubious. Reporters questioned organizers: “How do you know this is a bill? Shouldn’t social media be regulated?
Coincidentally, the very next day, the National Assembly’s Standing Committee on IT approved the same version of the bill that was circulated and discussed in the press conference.
Over the next year and a half, the bill was vigorously debated in and out of the assemblies – not because the government encouraged such debate, but because a coalition of civil society and industry, led by the opposition and The media had the support of allies, ensured that. . Despite the resistance, Pekka eventually saw the light of day. The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) stood as an open opponent of the bill, ensuring that its position was heard loud and clear. However, the bottom line is that the issue goes beyond mere currency.
Blank resistance
While several legislators within the party deserve credit for keeping PICA under scrutiny, resisting it in the Assembly, and proposing amendments, when it really mattered, the pace fell short – In the Senate, where the opposition had a majority. When push came to shove, the resolve wavered.
The bill could have been stalled further, but when it reached the Senate Standing Committee, there was a rush to end the debate, with claims that “enough time” had passed in the debate and that the bill is “required” to pass. Despite considerable input and alternative legal formulations provided over the past year and a half, claims were made that civil society has failed to deliver anything meaningful or timely.
PPP lawmakers patted themselves on the back for doing well — all of which ended up being nothing more than cosmetic tweaks to full stops and commas — for more than 50 amendments to PECA proposed in the Senate. were None of the significant changes suggested by civil society were ever incorporated.
Such disrespect was expected from the PML-N government. However, as the bill neared the finishing line, the PPP and its allies played their optics game, projecting an image of resistance while enabling the law to be enforced, if not blocked outright. could have done more to eliminate
The illusion of digital rights
Legislators often think that passing laws is the end of their responsibility. They like to present legislation as a feather in their cap. But the proof of the pudding lies in its implementation, which they don’t care to monitor. This is despite ample provisions under the legislative scheme, including standing and special committees, to enhance oversight and reform the law based on sound analysis, not knee-jerk reactions and conceptual issues. But
What amendments have been made to PECA since its implementation in 2016 to reverse its strict nature? Apart from the one-sided issues raised by the standing committees about its implementation, what monitoring, scrutiny or accountability has been done?
Even now, there are many speeches about Slow Internet speeds, and standing committees have been addressing related issues such as Web Management Systems (WMS) or firewalls. But what is the result of this examination? Has the government or PTA used the technology that has been deployed? His ability? Purchase and operation details? Did any legislator inquire about such details and follow through?
Parliament’s failure has been compounded by the courts where several petitions are pending, challenging the government and the PTA’s actions for overstepping their bounds and protecting fundamental rights, but to no avail.
In this environment, then, what is the significance of the ‘Digital Rights’ Bill? The extreme executive trampling on all things digital, including the PPP, has been empowered by the same legislature through the 26th Amendment, further weakening the courts. So how can one claim the Digital Bill of Rights with a straight face?
Another impending doom
Now, what? The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Amendment Bill 2025 is staring us in the face.
It creates more crimes, restricts more categories of speech, enables regulatory capture through a new authority, and adds more red tape with draconian procedures through the creation of tribunals. The bill empowers the hands of authorities who are holding the internet, services, platforms and citizens hostage.
Only time will tell whether these speeches will translate into concrete and concrete resistance – or whether they will be opposed and meaningfully blocked, rather than rubber-stamped as is the norm in Parliament. It’s done.
As they say, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
There is no ‘but’ this time. These amendments are not needed and are certainly not being introduced to protect citizens. That fig leaf is long gone. They only serve to maintain the status quo, controlling speech and information while further subjugating citizens.
Header image created by DALL-E 3.
