Justice Shakil Ahmad of the Lahore High Court (LHC) sharply criticized the state counsel on Friday for his apparent lack of “knowledge” and “seriousness” regarding the recent internet disruptions that have affected the entire country.
Since last week, major online platforms like Facebook and WhatsApp have experienced significant slowdowns, with users struggling to access messaging and social media services. Amidst growing concerns and speculation about the installation of a ‘firewall’ potentially causing these disruptions, the country’s IT Minister confirmed only a day ago that the government is indeed upgrading its “web management system” to address cyber security threats.
Minister of State for IT Shaza Fatima Khawaja stated that the government has requested a report from the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) and other relevant bodies regarding the internet disruptions. Meanwhile, PTA officials informed a Senate committee that the telecom regulator is “assessing the issue” and that the IT ministry would be better equipped to provide a comprehensive overview in two weeks once the assessment is complete.
The Pakistan Software Houses Association (P@SHA) has sounded the alarm, warning that the ongoing internet disruptions could potentially result in economic losses of up to $300 million.
Justice Ahmad was hearing a petition filed just a day earlier by Advocate Muhammad Nadeem, a resident of Lahore. As the hearing commenced, the judge directed that the federal government’s counsel appear before the court by 12 pm after consulting the relevant authorities.
When the hearing resumed, state counsel Rana Nauman requested additional time for the government to submit a “detailed report on the internet outages.” He stated, “We will have to ask the PTA why the internet is slow [and] what has happened.”
Justice Ahmad expressed his dismay, remarking, “This is a matter of public interest, and your seriousness is such that you do not even have adequate information [about this issue].”
The judge then indicated his intention to deliver a verdict on the matter. Emphasizing the public interest nature of the petition, Justice Ahmad stated that he would issue appropriate directives accordingly.
