Pakistan’s Digital Rights Crisis: Crackdown on Free Speech and Human Rights Under PECA 2025

Pakistan’s ongoing contest between authority and civil liberty took center stage on July 17, as the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) and the European Union convened a high-profile national roundtable in Islamabad. This event, triggered by deepening anxiety over draconian restrictions on freedom of expression and the accelerating erosion of digital rights, brought together a diverse coalition: academics, journalists, civil society leaders, lawyers, and digital rights defenders. Despite their professional differences, the group issued a remarkably unified warning—Pakistan’s war on free speech has entered a new, more technologically sophisticated phase.

Government Overreach: PECA’s Expanding Shadow​

At the heart of the roundtable’s urgency was the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), originally enacted in 2016 and now turbocharged by a controversial 2025 amendment. HRCP documents and advocacy repeatedly highlight how the government’s use of PECA—specifically its latest changes—have moved beyond classic censorship into a comprehensive, legalistic machinery for silencing dissent.

Section 37: The Blunt Instrument of Digital Censorship​

Of particular concern is Section 37 of PECA, which, according to digital rights activist Farieha Aziz (who moderated the panel), has become a catch-all provision for unaccountable online content blocking. The 2025 amendment, she argued, confers on the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) a nearly unchecked ability to dictate what Pakistanis can read, say, or share online—all without oversight from courts or independent regulators. Dissenting voices today face not only legal prosecution but also an opaque process where their digital presence can be erased by fiat.
Examples drawn from recent months substantiate claims of systematic takedowns of YouTube channels belonging to high-profile journalists like Matiullah Jan and Asad Toor. Their experiences—with content removed without warning or legal justification—were cited as emblematic of a broader, chilling trend: platforms complying with state pressure, often citing “compliance reviews” or vague community guidelines, but rarely providing transparency when Pakistani authorities direct complaints.

Beyond Arrests: The Economics of Fear​

Disturbingly, senior journalists such as anchorperson Absa Komal and Dawn editor Amir Wasim painted a picture of evolving repression tactics. Where the past might have seen public arrests and overt intimidation, today’s climate increasingly favors more insidious pressures: economic blacklisting, denied opportunities, and organizational warnings that promote widespread self-censorship. From Karachi to the capital, the effect is palpable—professionals, fearing for both their livelihoods and their families, now pre-emptively “bend to the line,” resulting in a sparser, meeker media discourse.
Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders corroborate this analysis, documenting a sustained pattern: in 2024 alone, dozens of media workers reported losing positions after critical reporting, and newsrooms were pressured to drop ‘controversial’ topics under threat of advertiser withdrawal or regulatory rebuke.

Legal Tools for Institutional Protection—Not Public Good​

Legal experts at the roundtable, including Advocate Talha Sarfraz Khan and Barrister Rida Hosain, issued trenchant critiques of the government’s co-option of defamation laws. Instead of defending ordinary citizens from reputational harms, these laws increasingly shield state institutions—army, judiciary, and police—from any critical scrutiny. As Advocate Usman Warraich put it, Pakistan appears to be drifting toward a state of “digital martial law,” where unchecked surveillance and legal intimidation combine to stifle the last independent voices in Pakistani civil society.

Disproportionate Threat in the Peripheries​

Although Islamabad remains the focal point of policy debate, it is reporting from Pakistan’s peripheries—Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in particular—that faces the gravest risk. Journalists and civil rights activists from these regions relayed accounts of not only digital surveillance but also physical threats and violence, warning that what once happened only in the “frontier” is now evident in Pakistan’s major cities. Censorship and repression, they noted, have become “normalized” nationwide, with rural and urban reporters alike receiving warnings, facing harassment, or simply disappearing from the national conversation.
Reports from international watchdogs reinforce these regional concerns, flagging Balochistan as one of the deadliest places in Asia for journalism, and highlighting recurrent blackouts and targeted abductions tied to reporting on human rights violations.

The PECA 2025 Amendment: A Critical Crossroads​

The 2025 amendment to PECA represents, for many participants, a critical inflection point. While the original act was introduced ostensibly to fight cybercrime, critics state that the amendments have weaponized the law against peaceful opposition and marginalized communities. According to a consensus emerging from the roundtable, the amendment is both unnecessary and dangerous—and vests alarming control in the hands of political authorities.

Judicial Exclusion and Secret Blocklists​

A key aspect of the new law is its lack of judicial oversight. Whereas most democracies require a court order to block content, the FIA now acts as both judge and executioner. Rights advocates caution that this bypassing of checks and balances not only erodes due process but also leads to rampant abuse: entire websites can disappear from Pakistani cyberspace overnight, with the affected parties often only learning of the ban after the fact.
Transparency reports published by global tech companies indicate that content restriction requests from Pakistani state agencies have more than doubled since 2022—a trend HRCP attributes directly to the expanded powers conferred by the 2025 amendment.

Criminalization of “Disinformation”​

The PECA framework does not only target overt criticism of state institutions, but also wades into the murky terrain of so-called “fake news.” Vague, undefined standards for what constitutes “disinformation” make it easy for authorities to target anyone whose reporting diverges from official narratives. This has prompted loud alarm among both local journalists and international bodies such as the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), which warns that poorly defined anti-disinformation efforts frequently mask political clampdowns.

Global Comparisons: From Russia to India​

Pakistan’s trajectory, critics say, increasingly resembles that of countries such as Russia, Turkey, and India, where wide-ranging digital regulation is routinely leveraged to stifle dissent. In each, the state claims it is acting in the name of “national unity” or “public order”—codes that citizens recognize as euphemisms for silencing opposition. Human rights groups cite numerous international legal instruments—including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights—which Pakistan has formally ratified but is “failing, in both spirit and practice, to uphold.”

The Human Cost: Fear and Self-Censorship​

Of all the roundtable’s revelations, perhaps most haunting was the story of how repression, once visible in the domain of public protest, now quietly permeates hearts and minds. In newsroom after newsroom, the message is clear: self-censorship is the new normal.

• Young reporters leave journalism amid warnings from elders and missing-person cases.
• Media owners spike stories deemed too risky, often without explanation.
• Social media users self-police, afraid to share, like, or comment on politically charged content.

These patterns are validated not only by rights organizations but by anonymous surveys conducted by the Pakistan Press Foundation that show a significant majority of working journalists now avoid certain topics entirely—especially those involving security agencies, religious minorities, or government corruption.

Collective Response and Hope for Reform​

Despite a climate of fear, the roundtable concluded with calls for solidarity and collective action. HRCP Co-Chair Munizae Jahangir argued that the only way to protect civil liberties is through united resistance—warning that authorities frequently exploit internal divisions among activists, journalists, and marginalized groups to weaken opposition.
There were several tangible recommendations:

• Repeal or amend PECA 2016 and its 2025 extension: Broad agreement emerged that the current framework is incompatible with Pakistan’s constitutional and international obligations. Some called for a new legislative approach, focused strictly on criminal harm and digital fraud—not political speech.
• Publish FIA data: Former senator and HRCP council member Farhatullah Babar called for the Senate’s Information Committee to make public all FIA actions under PECA. Transparency, he argued, would allow for proper scrutiny and accountability.
• Establish independent oversight: Several participants proposed creating an autonomous body—free from political control—to review content restriction decisions and investigate allegations of misuse, particularly in relation to blasphemy laws and hate speech cases.
• Target genuine threats, not dissent: HRCP Secretary-General Harris Khalique closed the proceedings with a call for authorities to distinguish between hate speech or incitement to violence (which merits legal action) and ordinary political criticism or journalistic inquiry (which must be protected).

These measures, echoing best practices from global democracies, are meant not only to restore trust but also to guarantee a meaningful public sphere where critical voices can again flourish.

Critical Analysis: System Strengths and Flagrant Risks​

Notable Strengths​

• Legal Sophistication: Pakistan’s digital repression differs from blunt authoritarian crackdowns in its legal veneer. The reliance on laws like PECA provides a patina of legitimacy that can both confuse the public and complicate international criticism.
• Technological Prowess: The state has rapidly scaled up its surveillance and censorship capabilities, using increasingly sophisticated tracking, filtering, and content removal systems. While deeply troubling from a human rights perspective, this technical competence does position Pakistan for certain forms of digital governance—though ideally, it would be redirected toward real cybercrime rather than monitoring dissent.

Systemic Risks​

• Erosion of Civil Liberties: The creation of a (legally) unassailable censorship apparatus undermines the constitutional right to free speech, with direct consequences for democracy, social trust, and national unity.
• Weaponization of Law: By drafting broad, ambiguous legal powers, authorities ensure they can target almost any critical voice at will. International human rights lawyers warn that such precedents, once set, are nearly impossible to reverse.
• Regional Destabilization: Especially in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, digital repression compounds existing sources of marginalization, jeopardizing both peace and Pakistan’s image abroad.
• Loss of Media Independence: As organizations self-censor and journalists drop out, the core function of news as a check on power withers, weakening society’s ability to push for reform or hold leaders accountable.
• Innovation Chilling: A digitally restricted environment stifles entrepreneurship, creative industries, and academic inquiry. Businesses and foreign media increasingly cite Pakistan’s regulatory climate as a reason not to invest or operate in the country.

The Global Stakes: Pakistan at a Crossroads​

Pakistan’s trajectory on digital rights now serves as both a cautionary tale and a catalyst for global debate. As more states seek to regulate speech online, the Islamabad roundtable’s warnings resonate far outside South Asia. Whether the current trajectory continues may well depend on the capacity of Pakistan’s civil society to resist—and on the willingness of international stakeholders to stand in solidarity with those at the front lines of the struggle.
HRCP’s closing message, issued by Secretary-General Harris Khalique, is stark: “Without freedom of expression, no civil, economic, or social right can be defended.” Whether Pakistan’s rulers heed this warning—or double down on digital authoritarianism—remains uncertain. But what is clear is that the world is watching, the stakes are high, and the battle for free speech, in Pakistan as elsewhere, is far from over.

---

Source: LatestLY World News | Pakistan's War on Expression: HRCP Condemns Systemic Silencing of Journalists, Activists | LatestLY