The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Bill, draft cybercrime legislation with scope to suppress free expression, came under intense criticism in 2015, in Pakistan and from international rights organizations and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression. On April 13, 2016, however, an amended bill that retained many problematic clauses was approved by the National Assembly. The Senate approved the bill outside the coverage period of this report, and it was adopted in August.[1]
Express Vpn Activation Code 28
Download: https://shurll.com/2vGAp1
New legal measures are particularly concerning in light of harsh punishments for online expression handed down in 2015 and 2016. Antiterrorism courts sentenced two men in separate cases to 13 years imprisonment for allegedly distributing "hateful" or "sectarian" material about religion on Facebook. Separately, individuals communicating online were charged under the 2002 Electronic Transactions Ordinance, an early ecommerce law, including a member of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf party who wrote about a judge on Twitter.
The PTA is the regulatory body for the internet and mobile industry, and international free expression groups and experts have serious reservations about its openness and independence.[23] The prime minister appoints the chair and members of the three-person authority, which reports to the Ministry of Information Technology and Telecommunication.[24] The repeated failure to make new appointments since 2013 have further undermined the PTA's reputation. In March 2015, the PTA formally took responsibility for internet content management (see Blocking and Filtering).
Overly broad provisions in the 1996 Pakistan Telecommunications Act already support censorship for the protection of national security or religious reasons.[31] Section 99 of the penal code allows the government to restrict information that might be prejudicial to the national interest, to justify filtering antimilitary, blasphemous, or antistate content.[32] Critics believe these issues can serve as cover for politically motivated censorship of dissenting voices. Information perceived as damaging to the image of the military or top politicians, for example, is also targeted.
Several laws have the potential to restrict internet users. The 2004 Defamation Act allows for imprisonment of up to five years, and observers fear a chilling effect if it is used to launch court cases for online expression. Section 124 of the penal code on sedition "by words" or "visible representation" is broadly worded, though it has yet to be applied in an online context.[66]
Section 295(c) of the penal code, which covers blasphemy, is frequently invoked to limit freedom of expression. Any citizen can file a blasphemy complaint against any other, and human rights groups say charges have been abused in the past to settle personal vendettas. The imputation of blasphemy leaves the accused vulnerable to reprisals, regardless of whether it has foundation. Many cases have involved electronic media (see Prosecutions and Detentions for Online Activities).
Laws to combat terrorism can also been exploited against internet users. The Pakistan Protection Act passed in July 2014, reformulating a problematic Pakistan Protection Ordinance. Despite the reformulation, critics said it failed to address concerns expressed by lawyers and civil society groups, who said language categorizing unspecified cybercrimes as acts of terror was vague and open to abuse.[67] 2ff7e9595c
Comments