here does one begin to chart the history of the current clampdown on digital freedoms in Pakistan? Does it start with the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, passed in 2016? Or was the starting point when the government banned platforms such as Facebook and YouTube in the early 2010s? Or does this predate the advent of these digital platforms?

While the PECA has emerged as the tool of choice for targeting journalists and digital content creators in Pakistan, the suppression of freedom of expression and critical thought is nothing new. The Federal Investigation Agency’s cybercrime reporting centre, designated as the investigation agency under Section 29 of the Act, regularly sends notices and summons to journalists for a variety of reasons, including the alleged defamation of state institutions. The police have been registering cases against journalists and arresting them well before the proliferation of internet platforms. Critical thinkers, including writers, artists and poets, were accused of obscenity and other offences long before any of us heard about Twitter [now, X]. The FIA last week filed cases against more than 150 journalists and vloggers for propagating “false narratives” against state institutions following protests by the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf between November 24 and November 26.

The FIA has sent notices to journalists belonging to the mainstream as well as digital content creators, sometime using procedurally dubious practices. Journalists receiving summons are often required to physically appear before the FIA to defend their online speech. Sometimes they have to travel to cities other than their place of work. Often, these summons provide very short notice, asking journalists to appear before the law enforcement agency in less than 24 hours. People receiving these summons are often unaware of the case filed against them as no details regarding the allegation or social media posts that led to the complaint against them are provided.

It was these procedural irregularities that led to the Islamabad High Court holding in a 2020 case, Rana Muhammad Arshad v Federation of Pakistan, that the FIA had acted in a “reckless and unprofessional manner.” The court ordered that the FIA develop standard operating procedures for issuing summons. Since then, the FIA has started including some lines regarding the allegation against the person being summoned; however, these remain vague such as “defaming institutions.”

In a case filed on December 10, digital journalist Harmeet Singh, has been accused of “propagat[ing] a misleading, concocted and baseless campaign against state institutions and security agencies of Pakistan.” In the case filed against him, the FIA has referred to Sections 9, 10, 11 and 24 of the PECA and Section 505 of the Pakistan Penal Code, which refer to “glorification of an offence,” “cyber terrorism,” “hate speech,” “cyberstalking” and “statements conducing to public mischief.” The FIR against Harmeet goes on to allege that his posts on X [formerly, Twitter], incited the general public to commit offences against state institutions and security/ law enforcement agencies, “creating a sense of fear, panic and insecurity among them.”

This weaponisation of the legal apparatus shows the determination of the state to clamp down on digital content and speech it considers critical. The amendments proposed to the PECA, which add the offence of “fake or false information,” include the creation of a new investigation agency, National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency, along with the so-called Pakistan Digital Rights Protection Authority that will be empowered to block and remove online content, including blocking of entire platforms, subject to the approval of a ministerial committee. Initially, the proposed amendments were not made public by the government. These came to light only after reports emerged in the media. Subsequently these received confirmation from the minister for information technology and telecommunications, Shaza Fatima Khawaja. The government introduced the Digital Nation Pakistan Bill in the National Assembly on Monday, laying the legal groundwork for an all-encompassing digital system at all levels of society. Digital rights activists have warned that in the absence of a human rights-compliant data protection law, the proposed law will enable a greater level of digital surveillance and control in the country.

The influx of new bodies labelled as ‘digital’ does not mask the fact that these are archaic tactics, dressed up to tackle supposedly new challenges. The animus behind these legislative measures is apparent in the secrecy and urgency with which these laws are being shielded from genuine debate and critique and bulldozed through the parliament. It seems that the government is hurtling towards another misguided and rushed legislative endeavour that will have implications for critical voices in the country, inevitably including those now occupying the corridors of power.

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