In Pakistan, the discussion on digital rights and internet governance usually picks up steam during internet shutdowns in times of high political activity or formulation of cyber legislation. While the coverage on issues related to stifling of civil liberties on the internet and cyber laws has relatively improved and is steadily integrating into mainstream reporting, a large number of people continue to lack a comprehensive understanding of their digital rights and remain unaware of the implications of their violations.
The gap in reporting on digital rights, their violations and its subsequent impact exacerbates the existing challenges to promoting digital literacy. The lack of timely, resourceful and straightforward coverage leads to a cycle where awareness is only raised in moments of crises, and deficient reporting creates a void in digital rights-focused tech journalism.
The most common reasons for the lack of digital rights reporting in Pakistan include a general lack of interest and understanding of tech-related issues, with many journalists and editors viewing them as too “technical” or not as “trendy” as other topics. While there is ample curiosity among journalists to contribute to tech coverage, media houses often prioritise traditional beats such as politics and crime. Newsrooms also face resource constraints, including lack of financial support, limited time, and tools needed for in-depth reporting on digital rights and a breakdown of complex tech-related issues for general audiences. Additionally, digital rights typically only gain attention during crises, leaving consistent coverage sidelined.
Abdul Moiz Malik, a journalist covering tech and social media for Dawn, believes that the media can play a critical role in addressing this gap.
“The media has a very important role in raising awareness about digital rights because it’s a fairly technical subject, so a lot of people don’t have the information,” Malik told Digital Rights Monitor (DRM). He emphasised the importance of explainers, particularly when covering new digital laws or cybercrime legislation. “You can’t just report that a law was passed; you have to break it down for people to understand what their rights are.”
Malik also pointed out that most journalists and media outlets focus on traditional beats such as politics, courts, and crime, sidelining more complex topics like digital rights.
“Covering digital rights requires research, expert interviews, and a better understanding of how the digital world works,” he said. “But with limited resources and a preference for quick, easily digestible news, media houses don’t support the kind of reporting these topics demand.”
Sindhu Abbasi, a freelance journalist primarily reporting on tech, shared concerns about the challenges in covering and pitching digital rights stories in Pakistan. “There’s a lack of curiosity among journalists when it comes to tech reporting. Many see it as boring, and editors often dismiss these pitches, saying they’ve already covered the topic, even when the reporting is surface-level at best,” she told DRM.
Although there is a lack of long-form or feature reporting in tech journalism, with many digital newsrooms relying on wire stories, Abbasi said editors are still not very receptive when she pitches stories on disinformation and digital rights violations as a freelancer.
“I try to go beyond generic topics, but editors often don’t fully understand or show interest in the technicalities of these stories,” she noted, stressing the need for a better understanding and training in tech terminology, as many journalists lack foundational knowledge to report on digital rights.
However, Malik’s experience is different, perhaps because he is associated with a leading media outlet like Dawn, which often carries stories, expert opinions, and investigative features on digital rights and other tech-related developments. When he saw untapped story ideas in social media and the digital world that others were not actively exploring, he pitched them to his editor, who was supportive from the start. This encouragement allowed him to dive deeper into the digital rights beat.
“I’m lucky in the sense that I never encountered any challenges while pitching the stories to my editor,” he said, adding that his pitches were never dismissed due to lack of interest from the newsroom or audience.
Malik credits his tech-savviness and familiarity with digital media as key factors that set him apart from his peers, making it easier for him to cover these stories.
Gibran Ashraf, Managing Editor of The Friday Times, also believes that editors are just as receptive to digital rights or technology stories as they are to any other topic. In his opinion, it largely depends on the journalist’s ability to make a convincing case for the story’s relevance, noting that a strong pitch can get an editor on board regardless of the subject matter.
Commenting on the gap in digital rights reporting, Ashraf said that the lack of expertise is a fundamental issue.
“Journalists in Pakistan have traditionally been siloed into beats like crime, politics, and sports,” he said while speaking to DRM. “Digital rights, along with emerging fields like data journalism and environmental reporting, require a new skill set that many journalists haven’t had the chance to develop.”
While Ashraf’s outlet tries to cover digital rights, they are constrained by limited resources. “We’re a small organisation with minimal staff and financial resources. While we do offer training, it’s difficult to provide the kind of support needed for in-depth reporting on technical subjects.”
Ashraf added that promoting conversations from multiple perspectives — technical, activist, and academic — is critical for understanding digital rights. “It’s not just about reporting the news; it’s about sparking the right kind of conversation. We need to ask ourselves, what voices should be included in this conversation, and what do we want the public to understand?”
Both Malik and Abbasi agreed that without regular, in-depth coverage, public awareness of digital rights will remain superficial. “If the public doesn’t know what’s at stake, how can they hold anyone accountable when violations occur?” Malik remarked. Abbasi, on the other hand, said that the media needs to prioritise digital rights coverage, and journalists need support to do it well.
These voices — whether advocating for better resources or calling for more comprehensive, investigative reporting — reflect the need for a systemic change in how digital rights are covered in Pakistan’s media. The media can fulfil its role in educating the public and holding institutions accountable for digital rights violations only by investing in the capacity of journalists and dedicating resources, including money and time, to these issues.
Understanding digital rights in light of Constitution
Internet disruptions and slowdowns are closely linked to digital freedom, as it affects individuals’ ability to access information, communicate freely, and engage in online activities. Digital rights include the right to privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information, all of which are currently impacted by unreliable internet connectivity and frequent internet shutdowns and platform takedowns in Pakistan.
Speaking to DRM, lawyer Abdul Moiz Jafferi emphasised the significance of fundamental constitutional rights that extend to digital spaces. “Article 16 and 17 declare that there is a right to assembly and a right to associate,” he explained, “but they must be read in tandem with Articles 19 and 19A, which ensure the freedom of expression and the right to information.”
Jafferi pointed out that understanding these rights together is crucial. “To exercise your Article 16 and 17 rights, you need what the Supreme Court has recognised as the key to all other rights — the freedom to information and freedom of expression.”
He elaborated on the interconnectedness of these rights, stating, “In the context of online assemblies and associations, the rights to express and to access information are key to attaining your right to assemble and associate.” Referring to the growing “digital repression”, Jafferi asserted that it is important to hold authorities accountable. “In an increasingly connected world, the fight for digital freedoms is a fight for democracy itself.”
The lawyer highlighted that “the right to assemble and the right to associate should be exercised without impediments caused by bureaucracy or procedural friction.” He noted that virtual assembly is particularly important today, as it represents “the easiest form” of gathering and expressing views. However, he warned that “these platforms must not regulate expression,” as this undermines the very essence of the rights granted under the Constitution.
“The recent digital rights violations — specifically the restrictions on expression and access to information — are attacks on Articles 19 and 19A,” he remarked. These violations manifest through government-imposed restrictions on platforms such as X, Facebook, and Instagram, affecting the ability to freely associate and express opinions. “The ban on Twitter [now X] is the perfect example of the violation of these rights,” Jafferi stated, highlighting how one violation leads to another: “A violation of the right to assemble is a violation of the right to express; a violation of the right to associate frustrates the right to information.”
He contended that the current legal framework is adequate to protect these rights, saying, “There is no need to update the legal framework. What is necessary is for the government to start behaving itself in line with the law.”
Jafferi remarked that while there are laws such as the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016, commonly known as PECA, which can be misused, they do not inherently prohibit association or expression. “Yes, there are draconian methods of using these laws,” he noted, “but we must focus on the government’s adherence to the existing legal framework.”
Gaps in data
During Pakistan’s 2024 turbulent election period alone, five internet shutdowns were recorded in January and February by Netherlands-based VPN provider Surfshark. These restrictions occurred both before, on the polling day, and after the elections held on February 8, with three imposed during the election period and two prior, coinciding with the virtual events of former prime minister Imran Khan’s party, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI). These actions were seen as attempts to suppress opposition and raised concerns about the fairness of the elections, with allegations of rigging further complicating the situation.
NetBlocks, another internet tracking organisation, reported a different number of disruptions, around 10 between January and July in 2024, with seven nationwide and three region-specific outages in Azad Kashmir and Balochistan. However, the slow internet speed and disruptions experienced by users in August, September, and October were not recorded or mentioned by the internet monitor.
On October 6, 2024, several internet users faced disruptions in different cities, coinciding with opposition party PTI defying blockades to reach the high-security Red Zone, D-Chowk in Islamabad to register their protest.
Bytes for All’s Kill Switch timeline, the sole local tracker, shows 26 unique disruptions from January to October 2024, resulting in over 45 days of connectivity impact. These disruptions spanned a wide range — from nationwide outages due to submarine cable issues to localised social media blockages during elections, political gatherings and major religious observances. In this period, Rawalpindi emerged as the most affected city, experiencing 10 disruptions directly linked to political and social activities.
Since at least July, users have been struggling with sluggish internet speeds and platform disruptions, making it increasingly difficult to access popular messaging and social media apps or to hold uninterrupted Zoom meetings. The internet speed dropped by 30 to 40 per cent in August, according to the Wireless and Internet Service Providers Association of Pakistan (WISPAP). However, the woes of Pakistan’s 111 million internet users are far from over, as the problems persist.
The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) ascribed the country’s painfully slow internet to faults in submarine cables, saying the repairs will be completed by October.
The absence of an official authority to record or verify internet shutdowns and platform takedowns in Pakistan is a major challenge for journalists trying to portray an accurate picture of digital restrictions. With no central database or accountability mechanism, journalists have to rely on reports from civil society organisations and international bodies for data on internet disruptions. Yet, discrepancies in reporting across these organisations make it difficult to understand the full scope of digital censorship and shutdowns.
The reality of internet shutdowns in Pakistan is that they are rarely isolated events confined to one city or region but rather part of a broader and systemic practice. This broader context is important, but without consistent and reliable data, journalists struggle to paint a holistic picture of how connectivity restrictions impact freedom of expression, digital access, and information flow across the country.
Real-time reporting
During the 2024 election, journalists also faced obstacles to real-time reporting under digital restrictions, which impacted both journalistic integrity and the public right to timely, accurate election information. Sibte Hassan, a reporter for Hum News, at the time, experienced this firsthand while reporting across Karachi’s District Central and District West. He explained, “At 8 am, polling started, and we realised mobile signals started going, but eventually, all cellular networks were affected.” His efforts to report live were thwarted, pushing him to record segments “as live” and later send them from nearby shops that had WiFi. However, this compromised the timeliness of his coverage.
“I recorded a video of people queuing up at a certain polling station at 12pm to highlight voters coming out in huge numbers, but it aired at 4pm, which defeats the purpose and impact of the footage and update.” Hassan’s challenges intensified when he and his team had to seek refuge in a school in Orangi Town for a stable internet connection to send timely updates to his newsroom. But he got stuck there amid chaos and accusations of election interference as voters thought the media was involved in rigging. He was rescued only when police intervened.
When reporters couldn’t send timely updates from the field, editors and newsrooms struggled to keep social media, websites, and TV updated due to limited footage and content. This gap prevented them from verifying ground information and opened the door to misinformation, as old videos from past elections circulated widely on social media. The unchecked spread of these unverified visuals risked swaying public opinion and discouraging voter turnout, impacting the election’s integrity.
PTA’s response
Another issue is that journalists covering digital rights often struggle when they seek official comments from the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), particularly on issues that involve criticism of its actions or policies. Malik shared that PTA’s responsiveness appears selective, with officials often ignoring inquiries on issues like X shutdown or the speculated “web management system”. “It really depends on what kind of question you are asking,” he noted, as his less sensitive and less controversial story—on human trafficking ads on social media—garnered a response, while critical questions on internet disruptions that impact digital rights remain unanswered. This lack of communication leaves journalists reliant on sources or often publish stories without comments from the regulator, which results in reporting being clouded by incomplete information. It also “leaves room for rumours and people speculate whatever they learn from unverified sources”.
Abbasi echoed this, observing that even if PTA initially commits to responding if you share you are writing for a reputable publication like Dawn, follow-ups frequently go unanswered. Journalists in Islamabad may have slightly better access by visiting the PTA office to get a response but they usually make the same statements as the ones they give while attending Senate IT committee meetings, but direct responses remain rare, she said. Malik pointed out that maybe seasoned journalists get a response since they have better access and direct contacts in the authority. Both journalists emphasised that PTA’s limited engagement hinders timely reporting and leaves important coverage of digital rights issues open to speculation.
When internet access is restricted, journalists cannot conduct real-time fact-checking and digital investigations, essential for debunking misinformation and disinformation. With limited access to fact-checking tools, such as reverse image searches, online databases, or social media platforms to effectively monitor and track misleading or false claims, it becomes challenging to verify claims promptly. This is important in high-stakes situations like elections, protests, or periods of unrest—times when internet disruptions are frequent in Pakistan. In such situations, unverified information is likely to spread like wildfire, leading to a misinformed public, increased potential for incitement to violence, and heightened social unrest.
For example, during recent elections, disinformation using AI manipulation was deployed falsely depicting Imran Khan and other PTI leaders including Sher Afzal Khan Marwat, calling for an election boycott. The videos later turned out to be deepfakes. Similarly, an old video of Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz supremo Nawaz Sharif announcing an election boycott widely circulated on social media. This caused confusion and cast doubt on the election’s integrity as viral misinformation suggested that two major parties were boycotting the elections. Misinformation and disinformation, particularly AI-generated content are difficult to counter in a climate where journalists cannot readily access social media platforms or digital tools necessary for verification due to internet restrictions. In these scenarios, fact-checking is not only a matter of journalistic accuracy but also of safeguarding digital rights and public trust in the face of evolving challenges.
Firewall speculation and the need for explainers
Activists, however, claim that the real reason behind the persistent internet issues is the installation of a China-style internet firewall to monitor and regulate internet traffic and content, which will have direct consequences on citizens’ digital rights. On July 26, the government confirmed its plan to implement an internet firewall for cybersecurity purposes, but rejected censorship concerns that it would curb free speech online.
Haroon Baloch, a media and digital rights expert at Bytes for All (B4A), said that the government has named the new system “firewall” to create a “positive connotation” in people’s minds, but it should be referred to as a “web management or filtration system”.
Baloch told DRM that the speculated firewall is “likely a combination of multiple web services, including DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) and a filtration system based on keywords. When specific keywords are input into the web management system, anything related to those keywords that appears on the Pakistani internet will be targeted, and this traffic data will be “flagged”.
“From what we understand, the government will likely use this system in a targeted way,” Baloch said. “For example, many websites, including Fact Focus, or those linked to the PTI are currently blocked. If people try to access these websites or use certain keywords on social media, the system will detect and throttle those conversations. It’s most likely an advanced system, but we can’t confirm its full capabilities until the government officially explains how it works.”.
Farieha Aziz, co-founder of Bolo Bhi, an advocacy forum for digital rights, is of the view that unlike a typical firewall, which is designed to protect devices like laptops from harmful network traffic, the “firewall” being discussed in Pakistan has no “protective purpose”. Instead, it seeks “to restrict the flow of information as a tool of political control”.
Human rights lawyer and activist Jibran Nasir expressed concerns about the lack of clarity regarding the speculated software. He said there’s no transparency on the specifics of the software, where it has been sourced from, or what data privacy provisions and rules are being implemented, and what the firewall will empower authorities to do.
“The situation is shrouded in speculation and mystery, which in itself makes the government’s actions and intentions appear suspicious, especially given the environment we currently live in and have been living in,” Nasir told DRM. “Gradually and incrementally, the state’s control over citizens’ daily lives has expanded—not only in terms of what we say, but also what we can consume, how we are expected to think, and the decisions we are supposed to make.”
He said the state seeks to impose its will through specific measures. This is not limited to the current government; however, he noted, but it has been a constant, regardless of who is in power. These incremental steps are never reversed when governments change, in fact, those in opposition today aim to benefit from such measures when they take power tomorrow, he added.
Amnesty International has raised concerns about ongoing internet disruptions in Pakistan, criticising the lack of transparency from authorities regarding the use of monitoring and surveillance technologies. According to Jurre Van Bergen, a technologist at Amnesty International, the deployment of tools that block or slow down internet access, including national firewalls, threatens online freedom of expression and access to information. These actions not only disrupt communication for citizens and the diaspora but also harm e-commerce and the digital economy, he said.
The organisation called on Pakistani authorities to clarify the reasons behind these disruptions and to ensure that any surveillance technologies used comply with international human rights laws in order to avoid unnecessary and disproportionate interference.
A widespread lack of technical knowledge among the public leads to confusion about how restrictive technology could impact digital rights. The technical nature of concepts like firewalls, encryption, and surveillance tools can make it difficult for many people to understand the extent of government surveillance and how these technologies work. As a result, social media has been flooded with discussions and concerns about potential breaches of privacy, with people questioning if the government could now access their conversations on encrypted apps like WhatsApp and FaceTime.
Ban on X — a continuing violation of constitutional rights
On 17 February, the constitutional rights of citizens were violated when the government suspended X (formerly Twitter) following allegations of vote rigging during Pakistan’s elections. The Interior Ministry initially claimed the ban was necessary for national security but disclosed the reason (unspecified threats) months later. Critics argue the suspension was aimed at controlling dissent and managing the election narrative. The government justified the ban, citing X’s failure to register locally and remove defamatory content. Ironically, many officials continue to using the platform via VPNs.
Nasir said that under the PECA’s Section 37, a “Significant Social Media Company” is defined as one with over 500,000 users in Pakistan or listed by the relevant authority. This definition indeed applies to platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), as it has a substantial user base in the country.
The Removal Blocking of Unlawful Online Content Rules 2021 establishes a framework for removing or blocking online content deemed “unlawful”. While the rules include “provisions that aim to safeguard freedom of speech and expression”, the use of terms such as “public order, decency, morality, and security of Pakistan — are vague and the definitions are evolving”, Nasir said. These ambiguous definitions can lead to inconsistent enforcement and potential abuse, raising concerns about the balance between safeguarding rights and restricting free expression.
He explained as per the rules, the government is expected to notify the social media platform about content it deems “unlawful”, give them a warning and chance to respond within 48 hours. If they fail to comply, he added, the government can block the platform. In the case of banning X, it failed to do so.
Nasir pointed out that Pakistan also faces the challenge of binding foreign social media companies by local laws, as many do not have a physical presence in the country which complicates regulating them effectively. The lack of transparency around these measures further frustrates citizens, especially when they rely on these platforms for communication and trade, he added.
Need of the hour
The ongoing situation is a major setback for multinational companies, entrepreneurs, startups and freelancers as it is leading to critical economic losses. The Pakistan Business Council warned on August 17 that failure to address the internet issues could cost the country up to $300 million.
The state’s disregard for persistent internet disruptions and the implications of surveillance tech is increasingly concerning. While experts and digital rights activists continue to raise awareness about these issues, a comprehensive coverage of the unfolding events in the country’s digital landscape is the need of the hour. Incorporating digital rights and internet governance issues in mainstream coverage, combined with active advocacy and initiatives aimed at enhancing digital literacy, can help empower citizens to understand and assert their digital rights, leading to a more informed and engaged society.