X, formerly known as Twitter, was blocked on February 17, 2024 in Pakistan. Why? We don’t know. The unannounced ban on a major social media platform, imposed just a week after the general election (held on February 8), has yet to be furnished with a sound justification by the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) and the Ministry of Interior — the key players in the X suspension saga. The ban has been taken to multiple courts. So far, the responses filed by the PTA and interior ministry have only layered the case with more confusion as stakeholders demand clarity.
The suspension of X has stretched to such a length that many of us following the case closely could easily recite the timeline of its events now.
It has been more than a month since X was blocked without any official explanation in Pakistan, and that too at a time when the public mandate remained suspended in the dark amid a flurry of uncertainty and concerns of potential rigging in the February 8 polls. The 2024 general elections were unprecedented in many ways: Election campaigns were repeatedly targeted with platform blockages despite court orders to ensure uninterrupted access; suspension of mobile internet services on the polling day, stripping citizens of their fundamental right to access to information, including details about their designated polling stations; hindrances to mobility, leaving many with a lack of access to essential services such as healthcare; and an overall atmosphere of alienation from real-time events unfolding during the polls.
Describing the impact of the X ban on Pakistan’s position in the global digital market as undermining would be an understatement. Pakistan, a country still struggling to catch up with the digital overhaul and where the internet still remains inaccessible to large sections of the population, has been securing gloomy spots in global digital rights rankings year after year, with the recent internet shutdowns and targeted blocking of X further dimming its prospects in digital growth.
More frustrating is the persistent unwillingness to acknowledge the internet as a major driver of economic development at a state level as towering claims to turn the country into a rising digital market keep collapsing with repeated repressive legislative attempts, which are largely aimed at enabling more formulated controls to curb dissenting voices and surveilling citizens’ data. Governments come and leave, leaving the promises to transform Pakistan digitally languishing in a quagmire of unannounced restrictions and arbitrary measures.
X ban lands in court
The suspension of X has been challenged in the Sindh High Court (SHC), Islamabad High Court (IHC), and the Peshawar High Court (PHC). The petitions against the ban in the SHC are being handled with a peculiarly surreptitious and obfuscating approach by the telecom regulator and the interior ministry. In its initial response submitted to the SHC, the PTA parked the onus with the interior ministry, saying it had received directives from the ministry (caretaker setup) to suspend cellular internet services on the polling day and that the telecom regulator was bound to follow the ministry’s instructions. No internet shutdowns were ordered after the elections day, the PTA said.
The interior ministry, which had already been issued notice by the court, failed to submit its response and sought an extension. The court granted it. In the second hearing, when the proceedings picked up pace, the PTA produced a “letter” apparently from the interior ministry, directing the regulator to block X “immediately until further notice”. The ministry failed to file its response, again. However, upon court’s displeasure, a written reply was submitted by a ministry representative later — it failed to address the ongoing ban on X in the country and slid the focus to the internet shutdown on May 9, 2023.
Legality of the ban
The handling of the ban on an important social media platform by the PTA and the interior ministry in court is alarming to the say the least. The ministry has yet to supply a sound explanation over the PTA’s disclosures and the telecom regulator itself needs to come clean about the legal powers that reside with it under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 — commonly known as PECA, wherein Section 37 concerning “unlawful online content” enables the PTA to take action independently. However, neither is taking a clear, definite stance on the matter and only appear to be rendering the case increasingly dense to comprehend.
Sadaf Khan, a digital rights and tech accountability expert, questioning the legality of the ongoing ban on X, called the PTA’s response in the court “concerning”. “The PTA has constantly held on multiple instances that they did not ban X, ” Khan, who is also co-founder at the nonprofit Media Matters for Democracy (MMfD), said in a statement to Digital Rights Monitor (DRM). “Now, for them to come back almost after a month and say they have banned the platform on the interior ministry’s orders is concerning and shows they lied to the court.”
In terms of legal procedures, Section 37 (unlawful online content) of PECA empowers the PTA to block content, but when it comes to platform takedowns, it is not that simple, Khan remarked. She added that the notice from ministry circulating on social media is a one-liner and only shows that a ban on X has been imposed, without any further explanation.
“It’s not clear under what law the interior ministry has initiated this action,” Khan said, questioning the legal parameters the PTA used to enforce the ministry’s directives. “If there’s a certain piece of content, page, or account that is creating “harm”, it somehow falls under Section 37 of PECA. However, blocking a whole platform without any indication of the framework — on which this decision has been made — is a gross misuse and abuse of the law.”
Violation of fundamental rights
Hija Kamran, a digital rights expert who leads GenderIT at the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), believes that the prolonged ban on X and misguided responses by the state authorities in court persist from the lack of fear of accountability and transparency embedded deeply in the political infrastructure of Pakistan. According to Kamran, X has enabled people to engage in dialogue around politics and current affairs in Pakistan — something that has not been witnessed in the history of a country where public representatives have persistently kept a communication barrier between themselves and the people they serve, creating a “power imbalance” in the democratic setup.
“While we already know that the ban on X is a violation of people’s fundamental rights to freedom of expression and access to information, it is also a direct attack on people’s political participation, which also is a fundamental right under the Constitution of Pakistan,” Kamran said while speaking to DRM. “X has been able to bridge that communication gap now that people are in touch with their political representatives and are able to express their opinions regarding the performance of decision-makers in the government.”
Kamran was of the opinion that through the continuing X ban, which is also an unprecedented instance of digital censorship in the country, there is a direct attempt to shrink the space for public opinion, curtail people’s freedom to political participation, and maintain the power imbalance between people and their political representatives. The lack of transparency glaring through the PTA and interior ministry’s denial of the ban speaks volumes about the level of impunity with which they operate, she remarked.
“They are not only attacking people’s rights, but denying their actions in the court, which is an indication that they are not afraid of being held accountable,” Kamran said.
A joint statement signed by over 70 CSOs, rights advocates, journalists, and individuals in other prominent positions has called for the immediate restoration of X, calling the unannounced ban on it an “arbitrary” measure. The signatories include leading digital rights organisations from both Pakistan and around the world, including Media Matters for Democracy (MMfD), Digital Rights Foundation (DRF), Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF), Access now, Reporters Without Borders (RSF), and Amnesty International.
