The recent approval of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Bill, 2025, by Pakistan’s Senate Standing Committee on Interior represents a grave threat to the democratic values of freedom of expression and press independence. By introducing provisions that criminalize “fake news” with vague and sweeping definitions, this legislation risks stifling dissent, silencing criticism, and further eroding the already fragile space for open discourse in Pakistan.
The most controversial aspect of the bill is the introduction of Section 26(A) to the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca). This new provision imposes up to three years of imprisonment, a fine of up to Rs2 million, or both, for anyone accused of spreading “false information” likely to cause fear or unrest. The criteria for determining what constitutes “false information” remain undefined, leaving these decisions open to subjective interpretation by authorities. Such legal ambiguity can and likely will be weaponized to target critics of the government, independent journalists, and political opponents.
The bill’s proponents argue that these measures are necessary to modernize the cybercrime framework and protect public interests. However, the absence of meaningful consultation with journalists, civil society, and opposition lawmakers suggests that the true intent may be less about protecting the public and more about consolidating governmental control over the digital landscape.
This is not an isolated development. In recent years, Peca has been criticized for being deployed as a tool to suppress dissent. The government’s track record of using cybercrime laws to intimidate journalists, activists, and opposition voices underscores the dangers of granting additional powers under vague legal pretexts.
Amnesty International has rightly cautioned that the amendments will “tighten the government’s grip over Pakistan’s heavily controlled digital landscape.” The establishment of the Social Media Regulation and Protection Authority under this bill further expands the state’s ability to block or remove content using broad and undefined criteria. Such provisions are in stark violation of international human rights norms, including the right to free expression, which requires that any restrictions be narrowly tailored, necessary, and proportionate.
This law risks making Pakistan’s cyberspace a tightly monitored echo chamber where only state-approved narratives can thrive. Journalists, whose work is crucial to holding power to account, will now face the prospect of criminal charges for stories that the government deems “fake” or “unrest-inducing.” Similarly, ordinary citizens using social media to express grievances or share opinions may find themselves entangled in legal battles for posts that challenge official narratives.
The government’s claim of acting in “good faith” is difficult to reconcile with the rushed passage of the bill amid protests from opposition lawmakers and walkouts by journalists. A law of such sweeping implications for civil liberties deserves extensive debate and scrutiny. Its unilateral advancement betrays an alarming disregard for democratic norms.
It is imperative to ask: Why is the government so eager to expand its power to police speech? In a functioning democracy, the state’s role should be to safeguard freedom of expression, not curtail it. By criminalizing dissent and tightening control over digital platforms, the government risks alienating its citizens and undermining trust in democratic institutions.
This legislation is a step in the wrong direction. It threatens not only the freedom of the press and individual expression but also the broader health of Pakistan’s democracy. The government must reconsider its approach, engage with stakeholders, and prioritize the protection of fundamental rights over the pursuit of unchecked authority.
If left unchallenged, the Peca amendments will mark a dark chapter in Pakistan’s democratic journey, leaving a legacy of fear, censorship, and silence where vibrant debate and dissent once stood.
