The Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Peca) Amendment Bill 2025 has sparked widespread backlash, with senior journalist Mazhar Abbas warning that these measures could lead to “civilian martial law.”
Despite the government’s justification that the amendments aim to curb fake news and misinformation, journalists and opposition leaders argue that the law is a direct attack on press freedom and an attempt to silence dissent.
Key Concerns Raised:
Media Gagging: Abbas said the amendments ban free thought, warning that “they first censored writing, then images, and now even speech.”
Vague Definition of Fake News: He questioned how the government defines misinformation and gave the example of allegations of election rigging, which are opinions, not necessarily fake news.
History of Censorship: Successive governments have tried to introduce similar laws, but each one has opposed them once out of power—raising concerns about short-term political motives.
Lack of Consultation: Abbas accused the government of falsely claiming it had consulted stakeholders before introducing the bill.
Government’s Defense:
Not Rushed, Not Rigid: Aqeel Malik, Adviser to the PM on Law and Justice, insisted that discussions had been ongoing for three to four years, citing global examples of regulating misinformation.
International Precedents: Malik referenced Australia’s ban on social media for children under 16 and US state-level laws against fake news, arguing that Pakistan also needs regulation.
Protecting Public Interest: He insisted the bill is not specifically targeting journalists, but aims to protect all Pakistanis from the harms of digital misinformation.
The Bigger Picture:
The Peca amendments have intensified the freedom of speech debate in Pakistan. Critics fear they could be used to suppress political opposition and independent journalism, while the government insists it is a necessary step against digital misinformation.
With protests from media organisations and opposition parties mounting, the question remains: Is this a genuine effort to regulate misinformation or a tool for political control?