Pakistan’s National Assembly passed the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Bill, 2025 (PECA Amendment), a development that has sparked widespread debate over its implications for cyber governance and fundamental freedoms in the country. The bill, tabled by Federal Minister for Industries and Production Rana Tanveer Hussain, promises to modernise the existing legal framework to address the complexities of the digital age. However, critics argue that it further entrenches governmental control over Pakistan’s heavily regulated digital space. The latest amendment, branded by some as draconian, introduces sweeping reforms aimed at combating cybercrimes such as hate speech, misinformation, and fake news. While these objectives seem noble, many fear that these provisions may serve as tools for stifling dissent and silencing critical voices.
The bill's passage was not without drama. Lawmakers from the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and journalists staged a walkout during the proceedings. This act of protest underscores the deep polarization surrounding the legislation. Babu Ram Pant, Deputy Regional Director of Campaigns for South Asia, voiced concerns that the amendments would “tighten the government’s grip over Pakistan’s heavily controlled digital landscape” if passed by the Senate. The amended PECA seeks to establish new institutions, such as the Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority (SMPRA) and the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA). These bodies will oversee digital platforms and cybercrime investigations, granting the government unprecedented control over the country's online discourse.
Proponents argue that the amendments are essential for ensuring digital safety and addressing rising cyber threats. According to the bill’s preamble, the legislation aims to align Pakistan's cybercrime laws with global best practices. The establishment of SMPRA is positioned as a mechanism to ensure accountability, protect citizens’ digital rights, and combat online harassment, hate speech, and misinformation. The government has highlighted the need to counter the growing misuse of social media platforms. With the rise of fake news capable of inciting violence, public panic, and reputational damage, policymakers contend that stricter regulations are necessary. Section 26A of the amendment introduces penalties for individuals found guilty of spreading fake or harmful content, with punishments including imprisonment of up to three years and fines reaching two million rupees.
Pakistan stands at a crossroads. The decisions made today will not only shape the digital landscape but also set the tone for how the country balances security and freedom in the years to come
However, critics argue that the broad definitions of offenses such as "aspersion" and "unlawful or offensive content" leave room for abuse. The SMPRA, empowered to block platforms for non-compliance, could easily be weaponised to suppress dissent. Civil society organisations fear this may lead to a chilling effect on free expression and press freedom. A particularly contentious provision is the authority’s ability to block or remove content deemed harmful or against the "ideology of Pakistan" within 24 hours. While ostensibly meant to curb harmful content, this clause raises questions about the criteria for determining what constitutes “unlawful” content and who gets to make such decisions. The replacement of the Federal Investigation Agency's Cybercrime Wing with the NCCIA also sparks concerns about the centralisation of investigative powers. Under the amendments, NCCIA officers will possess police-like authority to conduct raids, seize devices, and investigate cybercrimes. Critics worry this could lead to overreach and misuse of power, particularly against political opponents and activists.
The debate around the PECA Amendment reflects a broader tension between combating cybercrime and upholding constitutional freedoms. While Pakistan undeniably faces real challenges in the digital domain—ranging from cyberbullying to hate speech—experts stress that the solution must not come at the cost of free expression. International bodies and digital rights groups have emphasised the need for a consultative approach. They argue that Pakistan’s legal framework should strike a balance by protecting citizens against cybercrimes without infringing on their right to dissent. Digital spaces thrive on openness, and any overreach risks turning the country into a surveillance state.
Pakistan is not alone in its struggle to regulate cyberspace. Countries like Germany and Singapore have enacted laws to combat online hate speech and fake news, but they have done so with robust safeguards to ensure transparency and accountability. For instance, Germany’s Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) requires platforms to report their compliance efforts publicly, a level of transparency missing from the PECA Amendment. Pakistan could also benefit from involving civil society and tech companies in shaping its digital policies. Collaborative frameworks can help build trust and prevent the misuse of laws for political purposes.
The PECA Amendment Bill is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it reflects an acknowledgment of the evolving challenges in cyberspace and the need for stronger safeguards against cybercrimes. On the other, it risks undermining the democratic values of free expression and accountability. As the bill awaits approval in the Senate, lawmakers must address the concerns raised by journalists, activists, and civil society groups. Transparency in enforcement, clear definitions of offenses, and the inclusion of independent oversight mechanisms could help alleviate fears of governmental overreach. Pakistan stands at a crossroads. The decisions made today will not only shape the digital landscape but also set the tone for how the country balances security and freedom in the years to come. If done right, these amendments could foster a safer, more inclusive digital space. But if mishandled, they risk stifling the very freedoms they claim to protect.