DND Report
President Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) Afzal Butt called on Pakistanis living abroad to hold sit-ins in their countries when media right organization will sit outside parliament in protest against the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (PECA) (Amendment) Bill 2025 and the Digital Nation Pakistan Bill 2024. He said ‘We (journalists) will include the whole world in our voice’.
The PECA (Amendment) Bill 2025 and the Digital Nation Pakistan Bill 2024 were passed by the Senate on Tuesday. The bill was presented by Minister for Industries and Production, Rana Tanveer Hussain, on behalf of Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi. The PECA Act was already approved by the National Assembly and the Senate’s Interior Committee earlier. A majority vote also passed the Digital Nation Pakistan Bill 2025.
Amnesty International responded to the situation and released a statement claiming amendments were resented in the absence of any consultation or debate. This is untrue because media rights organizations were in contact with the Federal Minister of Information and journalists covered the parliament that was in session and everybody among the journalistic cadre had information about proposed amendments. Amnesty International further said that the newly created Social Media Regulation and Protection Authority and new provisions grant authorities power to block and remove content based on vague criteria, which will violate the right to freedom of expression and fail to meet standards of proportionality and necessity under international human rights law. This is again contrary to fact because the criterion has been laid out in the Bill. Has Amnesty International ever reprimanded journalists who had been defaming politicians, judges, and military officials without having any proof? Had it ever laid out a ‘code of conduct’ and ‘media ethics textbook’ for journalists to whom it is protecting who had been instrumental in spreading unchecked defamatory material against government employees?
Related Story: Media rights organizations do not have a moral right to reject the PECA Act
Had any action ever been taken by media rights organizations against those journalists (such as Javed Ch, Shahid Maitla, and many more) who had been playing the role of unofficial spokespersons of former military officers and had been providing their unconfirmed ‘interviews’ for bailing them out of moral charges they had been facing in the public domain although they (journalists) could not publish interviews of government officials who had not completed tenure of two years after retirement that is mandatory for every government official for sharing any information with media.
Had any action ever been taken by media rights organizations against those journalists who had been spreading fake information about sitting COAS; his family; and his colleagues; sharing names of officers sitting at sensitive posts in intelligence agencies; accusing them of what they have not done; accusing politicians for corruption without providing any facts and figures; claiming that Pakistan would face economic default next week/next month; spreading rumors that former prime minister Imran Khan had been poisoned in jail, spreading wrong information that Imran Khan would come out jail on so and so day and date; blaming the government for killing people on November 26 without providing names/addressed of presumed killed persons; passing derogatory comments on former Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Esa; fabricating stories that so and so from establishment met Imran Khan in jail, etc
Hundreds of such unfounded pieces of information had been shared by mainstream journalists, vloggers, bloggers, and writers but NO notice from PFUJ, RIUJ, Punjab Union of Journalists, Karachi Union of Journalists, Press Clubs, HRCP, Amnesty International, International Federation of Journalists, Reporters Without Borders, Transparency International or any human right organization/media right organization was ever placed to those who had been spreading disinformation, fabricated news and promoting Yellow journalism.
Can any media rights or human rights organization provide even a single notice that had been placed to those who by wearing the uniform of journalism have been providing false narratives? Has media organization ever suspended the membership of those mainstream media persons who had been operating as unofficial/unannounced spokespersons of former military men (such as former COAS Gen (retd) Qamar Bajwa) or those who had been spreading hatred against state institutions including the Judiciary, Military, Parliament and even against the Constitution?
Had media organizations taken any action against those who had been doing live shows providing fake documents against former prime minister Mian Nawaz Sharif, his cabinet members such as Kh Saad Rafique, Kh Asif, Shahid Khaqab Abbasi, Pervaiz Rasheed, against former president (now against President) Asif Ali Zardari (Calling him Mr. 10 percent) and PPP leaders such as Raja Pervaiz Ashraf (calling him Raja Rental) Naveed Qamar, Khusheed Shah and many more. Has there ever been any action from media rights organizations against those who fabricated abusive stories about late former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and even wrote books to defame her? The list of wrongdoings would be too lengthy to be read but the total sum is why media rights organizations appear on the roads whenever the government tries to fix loopholes in defamation and media ethics laws.
All over the world, the tort of defamation consists of both libel (written statements) and slander (oral statements). Now compare mainstream television shows and you can find how much recklessly slander has been used in Pakistan and that is unchecked and even ‘accepted’ by media rights organizations as ‘normal’.
In 67 countries of the world, mostly Europe and North America, the act of ‘insult’ and ‘defamation’ is a ‘criminal offense’ not a ‘civil offense’ and is dealt with by criminal laws, not through civil laws. In most member states of the European Union, the acts of defamation are criminal offenses. Out of 28 EU counties, 25 treat defamation as a criminal offense. Of those 25, 21 impose imprisonment as a sanction. In most of those 21 countries, imprisonment is imposed on the offender when the defamed person is a public figure.
Related Story: Map of European Countries penalize insult and Defamation as a criminal offense
Defamation laws in Europe vary across countries but generally aim to protect individuals’ reputations from harmful false statements, while also navigating the delicate balance with freedom of speech, particularly impacting media ethics through considerations like the “public interest” defense and stricter regulations for reporting on public figures; some European countries still maintain criminal defamation laws, which can lead to potential jail time for journalists in certain situations.
Insult and defamation are a criminal offense in Albania, Andorra, Antigua, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Macedonia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States ( in several states) and Uzbekistan.
Amal Clooney in a paper titled “THE RIGHT TO INSULT IN INTERNATIONAL LAW” writes that countries all over the world are enacting new laws that criminalize insults, and using existing insult laws with renewed vigor. Criminal defamation laws are widespread around the world and still exist in several U.S. states. Prosecutions under criminal defamation laws are routine even in some European countries. Several journalists in E.U. countries have been convicted of defamation in criminal trials.
Europe is taking extra measures to criminalize hate speech which is defined broadly as a direct or electronic communication that “advocates hatred” and incites others to harm or causes contempt or ridicule and some European countries are considering introducing new laws that would punish an offender with up to ten years in prison. Insulting the state’s officials or even the private sector and insulting the reputation of the state are serious offenses and deal with strict punishments in Saudi Arabia, In Kyrgyzstan, Article 11 of the Law on Countering Extremist Activity prohibits the dissemination of extremist materials that call for a “breach of national dignity”
Gambia introduced a new offence of “spreading of false news against the government or public officials” punishable by up to fifteen years in prison or a fine of sixty-four thousand euros. In China, it is a crime to be a rumor-monger, defined as an individual who intentionally posts a false rumor that is reposted five hundred times or more, or viewed five thousand times or more. In Qatar to create a website that spreads false news to jeopardize the safety or “general order” of the state is a criminal act.
Media rights and human rights bodies of Pakistan should review global laws dealing with acts of insult and defamation before asking why the government of Pakistan had converted defamation into a criminal offense (from previously a civil offense). They should also check what kind of acts are considered ‘criminal’ globally and then they should review Pakistani talk shows, vlogs read blogs, and decide honestly whether laws introduced by the government of Pakistan should be considered unjustified.
