Sunny
High: 33°C
Low: 27°C
Alerts
 
< >

The PTA’s Orwellian antics

Published: June 30, 2010

The writer is web editor for The Express Tribune (jahanzaib.haque@tribune.com.pk)

A leaked confidential draft of a plan by the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) indicates that the government intends to put in place a draconian system of monitoring and controlling the internet, a system which would greatly curtail freedom of users in the country, complete with dark Orwellian undertones. Needless to say, the document obtained by advocacy group Bytes for All has begun to make rounds online, leaving many worried about the possibilities of such a system being actualised.

The draft states that blasphemous content found online has created ‘dismay and discomfort’ among the government and people of Pakistan. It says that although websites had been blocked, blasphemous material had been replicated all over the internet and was easily accessible through a number of means, and that it has become imperative to monitor and control content in Pakistan. Building off this, the PTA has suggested a new policy guideline and the formation of a complaint cell and an evaluation committee which will monitor and block objectionable material. While such suggestions hint at a major crackdown on the internet in Pakistan, the thought police undertones become all too clear in the details of what material may be banned by the PTA in the future. To cite just a few of the more worrying guidelines, any or all of the following could be grounds for blocking of websites:

1. Websites that carry “objectionable content”.

2. Sites that bring into contempt the country or its people so as to undermine integrity and solidarity of the state.

3. Sites that carry material contemptuous of the defence forces, the police or any other institution of the government of Pakistan which divulge any secret information relating to defence and other services.

4. Sites that have propaganda in favour of any foreign state having bearing on any point of disputes or against any friendly foreign state.

5. And sites that hurt “national sentiment”.

If this draft is indeed part of the PTA’s upcoming plan to protect its citizens from blasphemous material, it is a poor one, an astonishing one, a sad one. If the PTA has even half the resources necessary to begin implementation of the above guidelines, it would mean a blanket ban on potentially millions of websites. There are many disturbing questions to be asked of such a policy. What is the definition of ‘objectionable content’? Why even bother to present other guidelines if this one will remain open to interpretation as a catch-all for the banning of material?

What is the definition of ‘brings contempt to the country’? Or for that matter, ‘hurts national sentiment’? Would this article count as an attempt to ‘divulge any secret information relating to defence and other services’ in its online form? There is little, I feel, that can be added to the debate on what to do with blasphemous content online, as we have already witnessed a huge outpouring of sentiment by the people of Pakistan in online forums including this newspaper’s website’s own comments section. Suffice it to say that the need of the hour now is less words, more action and more interaction between the authorities and pillars of state that govern the people, and the people themselves. We, as a nation, have to determine whether we are willing to hand over our freedom to the government in order to protect ourselves from information we construe as dangerous and harmful. Additionally, if it is found that the voice against such all-encompassing guidelines is in the minority, who will protect the rights of the minorities?

Published in The Express Tribune, June 30th, 2010.

Reader Comments (5)

  • aneeq
    Jun 30, 2010 - 2:33AM

    Why do tribune writers almost always seem to be in a rush to end what they want to say? The starts are quite comfortable and well paced but as they move to the end, the conclusions seem to bring up a policy suggestion or action-plan right at the end. And those too, not so concrete :(Recommend

  • Muhammad Ilyas Khan
    Jun 30, 2010 - 4:56AM

    Would that the government was as alert to safeguard the interests of the people of this hapless country in other matters of real concern than just blocking this website or that website. Would that the motherly care that our judges, our mullahs and our government extend to the people of Pakistan in terms of protecting them from seeing anything considered ‘blasphemous’, were extended in other matters which really matter to the millions of deprived masses of this country: matters such as protecting them against hunger and thirst, deprivation and disease, unavailability of health, educational and recreational resources. Nothing is more blasphemous than the hapless people of Pakistan commiting collective suicides, mothers and fathers killing their own children after the state and its guardians fail to provide them opportunities to provide food and shelter to their children through honourable means. Where are the guardians of our faith and our morality then? What are they doing about this most heinous of blasphemies: Criminal injustice in the society? For God’s sake O guardians of our faith and morality do things of real substance. Find and uphold the spirit of religion. Only this will save you people from the wrath of God and not blocking this website or that!Recommend

  • Uzair Javed
    Jun 30, 2010 - 4:19PM

    I think its because they get such little space to put their words that by the time they get to the crux of the debate, they have to wrap up the article. Other papers like Dawn or The News have more expansive articles, and hence more indepth content and more well rounded arguments. I would urge Tribune to increase the word limits for their articles, especially in the Op-Ed section.Recommend

  • Syed Muhammad Waqas Shabir
    Jun 30, 2010 - 5:58PM

    @ aneeq: Agreed!!!Recommend

  • Muhammad Ilyas Khan
    Jun 30, 2010 - 8:50PM

    I think the word limit which is from 540 to 660 words is adquate and should not be increased. People dont have much time to go through lengthy, wordy essays. Some of the best columnists in the world wrote short, precise and incisive columns. Arthur Buchwald, the American columnist is one such example. Express Tribune has introduced a good practice. Pakistan needs people who talk less and well and not more and repetitive!Recommend

More in Opinion

X