In tackling fake news, Pakistan is paving the way for further suppression of dissent.
The draft of The Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act, 2025 approved by the National Assembly is a deeply concerning expansion of state power over the digital landscape. Ostensibly aimed at countering cybercrimes and misinformation, the legislation’s broad and vague language leaves loopholes easily exploited for political suppression and censorship. Given Pakistan’s history of authoritarian crackdowns on dissent, it is hardly surprising that concerns are mounting over state excesses under the guise of maintaining “order” in cyberspace.
The amendments call for the establishment of a Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority empowered to remove or block online content it deems “unlawful or offensive.” Of particular note is the law’s emphasis on fines and imprisonment for sharing fake and harmful information, which can be arbitrarily interpreted to target critics of the government, journalists, and activists. Such concerns aren’t unfounded considering Pakistan’s history of weaponizing cyber laws to stifle dissent.
In 2020, journalist Bilal Farooqi was arrested under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 for allegedly posting content against state institutions. Similarly, in 2017, social media user Taimoor Raza was sentenced to death for allegedly sharing content deemed blasphemous. Both cases demonstrate how the state has already misused PECA. The 2025 amendments will only strengthen the government’s ability to suppress opposition.
The creation of a Social Media Protection Tribunal also raises concerns about lack of judicial independence, granting the government direct control over adjudication, though offering a final stage of appeal before the Supreme Court. Combined with the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency, this law effectively creates a state-controlled mechanism to police online discourse with minimal oversight.
Already under pressure, this bill raises further concerns over threats to press freedom, online privacy and democratic discourse—particularly on digital platforms. Rather than ensuring online safety, it risks becoming another tool for censorship and authoritarianism under the pretext of cyber security.
The government maintains the amendments would solely function to regulate digital media and not impact professional journalists. While no one can deny the need to curb fake news and disinformation, addressing the issue through vague and overreaching laws risks eroding fundamental freedoms.
Instead, the government must establish clear legal safeguards, ensure judicial oversight, and engage with civil society, journalists, and digital rights advocates to develop policies that combat misinformation without compromising free speech. A truly democratic approach demands transparency and accountability—not unchecked power.