Pakistani activists fight harsh IT rule that India scrapped


Pakistani activists fight harsh IT rule that India scrapped
Campaign material by Pakistani activists arguing for internet freedom similar to those upheld by the Indian Supreme Court last yaer
By Kim Arora

By Kim Arora

What India has discarded, Pakistan is close to embracing. Pakistani activists say that their governments is considering provisions similar to the section 66A of the Indian Information Technology (IT) Act that the Indian Supreme Court had struck down as “unconstitutional” in 2015.

In 2012 alone, Indian authorities made at least six arrests under the IIT Act, including for posts against politicians. In November 2012 when authorities booked two teenaged girls from Maharashtra for questioning a shutdown in an online post after a political leader’s death.

Sustained campaigning by students and activists who filed public interest litigation (PIL) cases led to the Indian Supreme Court in March 2015 striking down this law. The judges noted that it had allowed authorities to arrest individuals with impunity for any online communication that caused “annoyance”.

This law is what might find its way into an electronic crimes law in Pakistan, say activists.

Pakistan’s cabinet division first approved the Prevention of Electronics Crimes Bill in February last year. Two “leaked” drafts later, the national assembly’s standing committee on IT approved a draft bill in September 2015. This version is now available on the website of the Pakistan’s ministry of information technology. The draft is due for a parliamentary discussion, even as policymakers and activists pitch in with suggestions and amendments.

“There has been one meeting on this so far from what we know. Otherwise, there is no news. Its status is not clear,” says Sana Saleem, director of the research and advocacy group Bolo Bhi (Speak Up) in Pakistan that has been holding consultations with government officials and civil society on the bill. “In our briefings to the parliamentary committee, the Indian IT Act is our favourite example. Why push for a  (provision) that will be struck down?” she asks.

The most contentious parts of Pakistan’s proposed bill include Section 34 under Chapter III, which empowers government authorities to “manage information and issue directions for removal or blocking of access of any information through any information system.

The Authority may direct any service provider to remove any information or block access to such information, if it considers it necessary in the interest of the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court or commission of or incitement to an offence under this Act”. Section 19 of chapter II criminalises “glorification” of offences, convicts, terrorism, or terror organisations. These are punishable by a prison term of up to five years, a fine of PNR ten million, or both.

Advocate Apar Gupta, who worked extensively during the legal activism against section 66A of the Indian IT Act, says that the PECB is  “somewhat similar to the criminal provisions contained in the IT Act” in creating “special offences for content transmitted over the internet and financial crimes.” He finds the bill’s analogous section to the now scrapped Section 66 A of the IT Act, “more specific and limited than Section 66A.”

Nighat Dad of Digital Rights Foundation finds certain commonalities between the Pakistani PECB and the Indian IT Act when it comes to provisions that categorise the dissemination of “obscene” information,  and the failure of maintaining internet user records by ISPs. While Saleem has cited the Indian IT Act in her consultations, Dad feels its impact is “not readily visible.”

 "They blocked us without the law. Now they will be able to block us with it" - Ali Aftab Syed, Beghairat Brigade

“They blocked us without the law. Now they will be able to block us with it” – Ali Aftab Syed, Beghairat Brigade

“But there have been senate and parliamentary voices in favour of holding off the PECB from approval, or for getting rid of it entirely,” says Dad.

The PECB as it stands today, has its roots in Pakistan’s prevention of electronic crimes ordinance (PECO). Introduced in 2008, PECO lapsed after it could not be made into a law. It was moved for re-promulgation in 2009. The current Minister for Information Technology Anusha Rahman, then a member of the opposition, had criticised the move, saying that the ordinance would turn Pakistan into a “police state”. She had proposed amendments to it along with member of Pakistan’s national assembly Marvi Memon.

However, after taking charge as minister in 2013, she proposed filtering of YouTube content. YouTube was then already banned in Pakistan after a clip of the infamous and widely panned film Innocence of Muslims made an appearance on the video-sharing website. Anusha Rahman’s office could not be reached for comment for this story despite repeated emails.

Nighat Dad says that the YouTube blocks (YouTube now has a localised Pakistani version in the jurisdiction) would only become easier were the bill to be enforced in its current form.

“Political satire in form of memes, videos or caricatures can be a criminal act. Another example can be what happened with the tragedy that took place in Mina, Mecca, during Hajj. News outlets reported on the deaths that took place, and questioned the lack of security by the Saudi authorities. PEMRA (Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority) stepped in, and said that this criticism was not permitted, as it could impact relations with a friendly nation. This is a provision which the PECB would also include, and limit valuable discourse by media outlets, politicians, and citizens alike,” she says.

Artists who have borne the brunt of censorship are not swayed by the PECB’s promises or threats.

“They blocked us without the law. Now they will be able to block us with it. So I don’t have a concrete opinion on it,” says Ali Aftab Saeed, whose band Beyghairat Brigade shot to fame in 2011 with their satirical song Aalu Anday. Their 2013 song Dhinak Dhinak, was blocked by several ISPs in Pakistan.

“Maybe it’s a good thing. At least now we will know who is blocking what and why,” says Saeed.

Kim Arora is a journalist with The Times of India in New Delhi. She writes on digital culture and policy. This is a slightly revised version of her report published on Feb 14, 2016.




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *