RECENT attempts to ban applications and the

tradition of censoring content on the internet

are rooted in a misunderstanding of the
internet in policymaking and adjudication
circles. There is a dire need to reimagine the
internet in order for rights to be protected, the
digital economy to grow, and investor
confidence to improve.
The internet is a medium unlike any other; attempting
to ‘control’ it is impractical, counterproductive and
ineffective apart from being problematic in principle
considering the protections Pakistan’s Constitution
offers under i) Article 19 that guarantees the right to
freedom of speech and press freedom, ii) Article 19-A
that guarantees the right to information, and iii)
Article 10-A that guarantees the right to due process.
A surprise effort was made in February by the
otherwise missing-from-the-scene IT ministry to get
the cabinet’s approval for the Citizen Protection
(Against Online Harm) Rules 2020, under Part 2,
Section 37 of the Protection of Electronic Crimes Act
(Peca), 2016, that deals with “Unlawful online
content”. The Rules were later “suspended” on the
orders of the prime minister after domestic and
international backlash. It was an ill-thought-out effort
on the part of the ministry. It showed a blatant
disregard for fundamental rights and the well-being of
an economy with an ever-growing tech sector
estimated at $3.5 billion that is projected to double in
the next two to four years, with IT exports having
crossed the billion-dollar mark in 2017-18, according
to the Board of Investment (BoI).
Companies are more likely to invest
here if there are no threats of measures
to block apps and websites.
The Rules go beyond the scope of powers defined
under the already problematic Section 37 of Peca.
They require data localisation and local offices of
social media companies already overwhelmed by a
plethora of undemocratic requests for state
censorship and enforcement of local rules for social
media companies when their universal community
standards are ever-evolving. This makes the situation
of internet freedom, citizen’s digital rights, and
industry’s ease of doing business a lot worse, and
undermines Digital Pakistan goals set by the
government itself.
Companies are more likely to invest in Pakistan if
there are no threats of arbitrary measures by the
government to block apps and websites; Pakistan’s
2008 blocking of YouTube had affected the latter’s
global access; and the current threats of blocking
internet platforms by the Pakistan Telecommuni-
cation Authority (PTA) make it a not very charming
destination for internet companies.
A fundamental shift in how the internet is imagined in
Pakistan requires amending Peca to delete Section 37
which deals with “Unlawful online content”. It has
wide-ranging impact as a tool of censorship in the
hands of the state, and is often abused under the garb
of protecting citizens or national security.
Section 37 has been abused by the PTA to censor a
political party’s website before the 2018 general
elections, censor local and international news
websites, and send requests to social media
companies to take down content critical of state
policies among other content. The Pakistan
government’s requests to Facebook accounted for an
astounding 31 per cent of the total requests from
governments received by Facebook globally. The over
10,000 requests to Google by the PTA in the past
decade ironically included a request to take down an
open letter by Pakistani academics calling for an end
to curbs on academic freedom in the country.
Such embarrassing steps make a mockery of our
democracy and rights enshrined in the Constitution.
Moreover, they also negatively impact the confidence
that Pakistan’s booming tech industry and efforts of
the BoI have garnered as evident from Pakistan’s 28-
point jump in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing
Business ranking in 2020. Arbitrary blocking of
applications this year such as BIGO live, videogame
PUBG, and threats of banning popular video-sharing
app TikTok, and a judge’s remarks regarding the
potential banning of YouTube pose a challenge to this
developing improvement.
Without Section 37 of Peca and the “Citizen
Protection” Rules under it, citizens still have adequate
avenues of protection. These include Peca’s Sections
10, 11, 12, 16, 20, 21, 22, and 24 that deal with
cyberterrorism; hate speech; recruitment, funding, or
planning of terrorism; unauthorised use of identity
information; dignity of a natural person; modesty of a
person or minor; child pornography; and
cyberstalking respectively. Subsections under Sections
20, 21, 22 and 24 enable aggrieved parties to apply to
the PTA for “removal, destruction” or “blocking” of
such information.
Additionally, community guidelines of social
networking websites cover wide categories of harmful
content through reporting mechanisms managed by
dedicated teams, including local language moderators,
that act upon complaints by users and local civil
society organisations as well as governments.
What are some key aspects of the nature of the
internet that are important to understand before
setting forth on internet policymaking? First, the
voluntary nature of accessing content on the internet
whereby the user seeks content by actively searching
or subscribing to sources of information. No content
on the internet is unavoidable and self-regulation is
easily possible.
Second, the internet is a global repository of
information without borders for access to knowledge
and information. Attempts to build walls on the
internet and localising it are ineffective and impact a
country’s progress.
Third, control is user-centric, where internet
platforms offer a strong element of control to the user
through the ability to subscribe, unsubscribe, block,
mute, set filters for children, and also report content
they find inappropriate to the platform. Action is
taken if the offence is of a serious nature.
Lastly, information technology and the internet is one
of the most rapidly evolving fields, so security of
online systems and ways of bypassing them are also
ever-evolving. Hence, logic dictates that policies be
based on this understanding, otherwise they risk
being short-term stopgaps. Banned apps and websites
even in China are easily accessible through VPNs.
What Pakistan needs is a robust IT ministry that
pushes industry and citizen rights-centric policies that
ameliorate Pakistan’s digital transformation, rather
than parallel competing and confusing structures that
end up letting draconian and ill-informed
paternalistic measures slip into enforcement to the
detriment of the future of Pakistani citizens.
The writer is director of Bolo Bhi, an advocacy forum
for digital rights.