ver the last few months, internet users in Pakistan have been forced to contend with the direct results of digital authoritarianism. In mid-July, users of mobile data across the country were left wondering why data on their WhatsApp refused to download without a VPN. As this coincided with a worldwide Microsoft outage, many assumed that it was the trickle-down effect. The information minister said it was a global WhatsApp glitch. The claim was promptly denied by Meta, the company that owns WhatsApp. A smokescreen has persisted since then with different ministers and government bodies blaming the internet slowdown on a range of reasons, including the over-use of VPNs, upgrade of their web monitoring system and submarine cable disruptions. These statements have led to speculation that something sinister is afoot. Is it the installation of the great Pakistan firewall?

The firewall has become shorthand for a system or cluster of technologies used to filter content on the internet, raising concerns about the state of our digital rights to expression, information and privacy. As mainstream consciousness becomes aware of the importance of the internet and access to it, there is a need to understand the implications of increased surveillance and monitoring in our lives, freedoms and collective futures.

It is hard to overstate the significance of digital technologies in our lives. More than half of Pakistan’s population is under the age of 35. A comfortable majority of the population has grown up with the internet being an integral part of the world around them. While digital access is still a major issue, there are 140 million broadband subscribers, 193 million mobile phone users and 136 million mobile internet users in the country. It is safe to say that most of the population is now connected to digital technologies. The number is higher still considering shared devices and connections within households. This digital explosion can be observed in the evolution of the content over the last six years. YouTube channels reflect a diversity of content from rural areas and a linguistic and geographic range unprecedented in mainstream visual depictions of the country. TikTok hosts digital expression of a largely young population, cutting across barriers of class, gender and ethnicity. Both these platforms have suffered from long-term and intermittent bans in Pakistan. These spaces exist and remain relevant in spite of the arbitrary restrictions placed on them.

Social movements since 2018 have also reflected the vocabulary of the internet, whether it is the confrontational tenor of the Aurat Marches leveraging social media to mobilise and provoke patriarchal mindsets or collectives confronting extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and systemic discrimination. Marginalised communities have emerged from the margins of the mainstream consciousness to claim its centre, forcing the country to confront uncomfortable realities. Surveillance and monitoring technologies such as firewalls threaten the development and proliferation of these movements.

In the context of controlled mainstream media and a dearth of avenues for public expression, greater control on the content one can post, access and its privacy is bound to stifle how people engage with digital spaces.

With the growth of the digital economy and new ways of working, the internet provides the backbone for economic transformation and uplift. The IT industry has raised the alarm regarding the financial loss accrued due to internet shutdowns and disruptions amounting to millions of rupees. However, the impact on individual content creators, small internet-operated businesses and workers in the gig economy is often not captured in these figures. These are already precarious workers, largely part of the informal economy, who disproportionately suffer when wholesale bans are placed on applications or internet services are disrupted. As young people turn to a global job market accessible through remote work in the face of a devaluing rupee, disrupting the internet disrupts livelihoods.

It is this social, cultural, economic and political importance of the internet that makes the prospect of a firewall so deleterious. In the context of highly controlled mainstream media and a severe dearth of avenues for public expression, greater control on the content one can post and access and its privacy is bound to stifle how one engages with digital spaces. Already, in light of the revelations regarding the capacity of the Lawful Intercept Management System to surveil telecommunications has given rise to panic about the level of intrusion in digital communication. Regardless of the extent of the intrusive capacity to monitor online activities, mere awareness of it can have a chilling effect on the expression, creativity and mobilisation in digital spaces.

The animus of the government in introducing monitoring systems has been demonstrated in recent public statements regarding internet regulation and the role of social media in creating counter-narratives. Speech by journalists, activists and political opponents has been labelled as ‘digital terrorism.’

Digital spaces often reflect the fissures in a fraught society; if there is misinformation or harmful content on the internet, the society must contend with why these problems manifest online. The easy way out is to block or restrict content. However, speech or content controls are only superficial band-aids. While speech inciting violence and harmful ideas needs regulation, casting a wide range of activities on the internet under the rubric of ‘digital terrorism’ only serves those in power. The biggest victims of a great firewall will be the majority of Pakistanis who turn to digital spaces in search of diverse and critical voices. We owe it to future generations to fight for digital spaces that provide space for self-expression, creativity and speaking truth to power.

The writer is a researcher and campaigner on human rights and digital rights issues