{"id":41,"date":"2011-12-10T17:12:38","date_gmt":"2011-12-10T17:12:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/?p=41"},"modified":"2011-12-10T17:12:38","modified_gmt":"2011-12-10T17:12:38","slug":"pakistan","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/2011\/12\/10\/pakistan\/","title":{"rendered":"Pakistan"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last month (November 2011) Pakistan made a striking move unprecedented for a contemporary society.\u00a0 It listed 1500 words in English and Urdu that it considered obscene or blasphemous and ordered cell phone companies to block any texts containing these words.\u00a0 These included common swear words as well as words as unassuming as \u201cidiot,\u201d \u201cfart,\u201d \u201cJesus,\u201d and \u201cheadlights.\u201d[1]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 If the order holds, it will probably have sweeping effects on communications in the country, heavily restricting the free rights of common people in Pakistan to communicate by text messages.\u00a0 Furthermore, it is unlikely that restrictions will stop there; will the Internet in general see a similar set of restrictions??\u00a0 Measures proposed on censorship in the past few years suggest that this may be a possibility.<\/p>\n

The government claims that the new list of banned words follows from a 1996 law.\u00a0 This law prevents people from sending information that is \u201cfalse, fabricated, indecent, or obscene\u201d across any method of communication.[2]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Yet in the past fifteen years Pakistan\u2019s cyber laws have adjusted in significant ways, leading from the relatively vague 1996 law to the current situation.\u00a0 The first such law was passed in 2002, called the \u201cElectronic Transaction Ordinance.\u201d\u00a0 This law gives as punishment imprisonment for up to seven years for the access of information on\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 private networks.[3]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Though some may see this as an indication of Pakistan\u2019s willingness to protect privacy, by recognizing specifically the security of networks it seems more geared toward protecting financial and, more importantly, government data.\u00a0 In addition, it provided the first measures of cyber-security in Pakistan.\u00a0 Pakistan has taken a preemptive stance of the threats of cyber criminals and cyber terrorists, as indicated by many laws passed that specifically are geared towards these groups.\u00a0 In this act, Pakistan hoped to punish those who specifically sought to damage information systems.[4]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 These measures appear to be noble, and are fairly standard (if broad) measures of protection against cyber criminals.<\/p>\n

Pakistan first begins to show its more restrictive side in the 2007 follow-up to this law, the Electronic\/Cyber Crime Bill.\u00a0 The law was passed while President Pervez Musharraf was in power.\u00a0 Musharraf was known for abusing autocratic powers by imposing emergency military powers in conditions without crises.\u00a0 The law passed under him bears the weight to a great extent of these restrictive measures.\u00a0 They were passed in response to complaints by Pakistani citizens in the blogosphere.\u00a0 The law expressly prohibits the use of the Internet to criticize authorities or call for anti-government rallies.[5]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 This is the first instance where the government seems to be showing a direct desire to curb dissent, as expected in a semi-authoritarian government like Musharraf\u2019s. It prevents people from taking photos and uploading or sending them if they contain \u201cindecent material,\u201d a key precedent for the later ban on actual words.\u00a0 It goes on to describe numerous forms of cyber crimes, such as fraud, defamation, and even spamming, gives a definition of each one, and gives prison sentences for each crime.[6]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 The \u201ccrime\u201d of pornography is given one of the longest prison sentences: 10 years.\u00a0 This probably derives from the Islamic cultural background, as policies undertaken in the country are often expected to promote Islamic values, just as many American laws promote Christian values.<\/p>\n

Bloggers were quick to note, however, the vague definitions of many of the crimes listed.\u00a0 \u201cSpoofing\u201d and \u201cspamming\u201d are inherently vague acts and may be used as means to prevent the publication of criticism of the state.[7]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Even more dangerous, however, is the definition of \u201ccyber terrorism,\u201d an act punishable by death.\u00a0 It is essentially given no definition: the performance of a \u201cterroristic act\u201d on the Internet.[8]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 With enforcement of the law given to the Federal Investigation Authority that hilariously purports to punish \u201canti-democratic forces,\u201d it is not unfounded to say that these vague definitions may see abuse.[9]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Others, however, have given more credit to Pakistan, saying that cyber terrorism only results in the death sentence when the actions that the perpetrators resulted in the death of somebody else.\u00a0 Furthermore, Pakistan has in general enjoyed a free press to date, with vibrant government criticism present on television.\u00a0 The definitions of words like \u201cspamming\u201d and \u201cspoofing\u201d have enough context in them to specifically target dangerous perpetrators of cyber-crimes.[10]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Nevertheless, Pakistanis hoped that the transition in government from President Musharraf to current President Asif Zardari would end any movement towards Internet censorship.\u00a0 Zardari, the widower of the assassinated Benazhir Bhutto, represents the liberal Pakistan People\u2019s Party.[11]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Despite these claims, cyberlaw has only become more restrictive since Zardari became president of Pakistan.\u00a0 In 2009, Rehman Malik, the interior minister, banned all electronic communications which \u201cslander the political leadership\u201d of Pakistan.[12]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 They were developed specifically in response to jokes about President Zardari resulting from disappointments of the current state of government in Pakistan.[13]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 This is pretty clear since the new laws were implemented after someone was smart enough to send these jokes to the president\u2019s e-mail.\u00a0 Of course, Zardari has claimed that the laws are to counteract \u201cabuse of women\u201d in government and, as always, \u201cterrorism.\u201d\u00a0 It is pretty clear, though, that Pakistan\u2019s supposedly democratic government is taking clearer and clearer steps away from promoting the freedom of expression and towards promoting censorship.\u00a0 Its unfortunate especially since freedom of expression is guaranteed in Pakistan\u2019s constitution.\u00a0 Taking steps to put in power a more \u201cliberal\u201d government has solved none of its problems.<\/p>\n

Recent censorship imposed by Pakistan\u2019s government has been escalating out of control.\u00a0 Earlier this year (2011), Pakistan blocked Rolling Stone after an article published on its web site criticized Pakistan\u2019s levels of military spending.[14]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 It is difficult to continue to argue that Pakistan\u2019s press is free and vibrant when such arbitrary restrictions are forced upon Pakistan\u2019s Internet service providers.\u00a0 Of course the government argued that doing this was due to the \u201cscantily clad women\u201d on the site, but of course this did not make them ban sites with similar images.\u00a0 Facebook was temporarily blocked this year as well due to the prevalence of cartoons perverse to the Islamic religion on its site (of course, Facebook, in the spirit of free expression, did not remove them when asked).[15]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 In both circumstances, when the government could have blocked only the single troublesome page, they instead chose to block the entire website.\u00a0 Many speculate that this was done with clear political goals and hopes to prevent the Internet from becoming a place of vibrant government criticism.\u00a0 In a completely political vain, an independence site for the Balochi population (an ethnic minority within Pakistan\u2019s borders) was blocked.[16]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 The government is even considering blocking Google if it does not do better to assist Pakistan in its cyber-terrorism efforts!\u00a0 The good news is that many of these blocks are easily circumvented by anyone with some knowledge of how computers work.[17]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 It is difficult to imagine, however, how long Pakistan will continue to be heralded as a \u201cdemocratic\u201d if the government (effectively or not) imposes such restrictions upon the activities of its citizens.<\/p>\n

In this context, Pakistan\u2019s arbitrary ban on the use of certain words while texting is less shocking.\u00a0 They result from a slowly escalating tendency to block modern forms of communication to prevent the spread of government dissent.\u00a0 Whether inspired by Islam or not, whether with the noble aims of preventing cyber-terrorism or not, it poses a number of questions about what a free society ought to naturally allow its citizens to do and how governments can go too far in the modern era.\u00a0 Pakistan will continue to be an interesting case to observe in the next few years to see how common people react to the most restrictive recent trends.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n
\n

[1]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/pakistan-bans-obscene-words-cell-phone-texts-122933488.html<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[2]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[3]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/www.slideshare.net\/mehmood_taha\/cyber-laws-in-pakistan<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[4]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> ibid.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[5]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/southasia.oneworld.net\/Article\/new-cyber-law-in-pakistan-restricts-free-speech<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[6]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/www.slideshare.net\/mehmood_taha\/cyber-laws-in-pakistan<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[7]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/www.guardian.co.uk\/commentisfree\/2009\/feb\/10\/pakistan-cyber-terrorism-law<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[8]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/southasia.oneworld.net\/Article\/new-cyber-law-in-pakistan-restricts-free-speech<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[9]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/www.guardian.co.uk\/commentisfree\/2009\/feb\/10\/pakistan-cyber-terrorism-law<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[10]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/www.guardian.co.uk\/commentisfree\/2009\/feb\/24\/pakistan-terrorism<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[11]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/cyberlaw.org.uk\/2009\/07\/28\/pakistan-president-asif-zardari-bans-jokes-ridiculing-him-telegraph\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[12]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/cyberlaw.org.uk\/2009\/07\/28\/pakistan-president-asif-zardari-bans-jokes-ridiculing-him-telegraph\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[13]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> \u201cTerrorists have kidnapped our beloved Zardari and are demanding $5,000,000 or they will burn him with petrol. Please donate what you can. I have donated five litres.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[14]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/censorshipinamerica.com\/2011\/07\/26\/7462\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[15]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> https:\/\/www.eff.org\/deeplinks\/2011\/09\/week-internet-censorship-blocking-social-sites<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[16]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/censorshipinamerica.com\/2011\/07\/26\/7462\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[17]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/contributions\/internet-censorship-increases-in-pakistan\/6831\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Last month (November 2011) Pakistan made a striking move unprecedented for a contemporary society.\u00a0 It listed 1500 words in English and Urdu that it considered obscene or blasphemous and ordered cell phone companies to block any texts containing these words.\u00a0 These included common swear words as well as words as unassuming as \u201cidiot,\u201d \u201cfart,\u201d \u201cJesus,\u201d […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4493,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-41","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4493"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=41"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":43,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41\/revisions\/43"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=41"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=41"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/aroundtheworld\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=41"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}