Don’t even think about a ban on Google

No state has the right to act like a net nanny.


Farrukh Khan Pitafi June 14, 2013
The writer hosts a show called “Capital Circuit” for News One and tweets @FarrukhKPitafi

In the federal finance minister’s speech, the proposed auction of 3G spectrum found a special mention. And this is not the first mention of its sort. In the recent past, we have seen former finance minister Dr Hafeez Sheikh promising the auction of 3G spectrum more than once in his budget speeches. And why should any government not talk about it? Our fiscal deficit and debt have reached frightening levels and the state needs money if it wants to bring the economy back from the brink. While the previous government had demons of its own — corruption scandals, poor relations with the judiciary and poor public image being some of them — this new government can accomplish the sale of the spectrum relatively easily because of its fresh start and better image. In a country starved of economic activity, this will be a welcome development.

Unfortunately, however, the indicators are not right. YouTube, the most renowned video portal used the world over, has been blocked in Pakistan for a while now. It is widely believed that with this ban in place, an auction will not attract the right kind of investor attention and may bring back less money than otherwise expected. Of course, everyone was expecting that the new government would show moral courage and restore it. It did not. And the purported statement of the new Information Technology state minister, Anusha Rehman, has given birth to new doubts and fears. While we know that the junior minister believes in restoring YouTube after putting in place the adequate filters to remove access to any content deemed blasphemous, the statement also mentioned that if Google, which operates YouTube, did not cooperate, the government might have to ban the rest of Google services in Pakistan as the last resort. There is a chance, of course, that she might have been misquoted but if my sources are correct, a statement to this effect was indeed made.

Now, with a YouTube ban, the auction of 3G spectrum would have been difficult, yet not impossible. But a blanket ban on Google would simply mean disaster. It is common knowledge that a majority of 3G cell phones use Google’s operating system known as Android. And that is not all. Services like Google Maps and Google Play are fairly well known and thoroughly used. With a blanket ban on Google services, you can safely say goodbye to the distant dreams of a 3G auction. It is precisely this attitude and the state’s obsession with regulating the consumer choices and freedoms that have clearly distanced us from various investors like Etisalat.

Add to it the fact that the Supreme Court has already taken a suo motu notice of the blasphemous content on the internet at the request of a UK-based Pakistani and sought a report from the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) within a week. This could allow the PTA to take matters out of the government’s hands. Why else would a UK-based barrister want to deny us access to wider internet when this ban doesn’t provide him any relief? Interestingly, the matter of locus standi was not raised here. We all know that the PTA has done precious little for the last few years except for trying to curtail our freedoms and restrict our choices. Or then this could be the sensitivities of our deep state regarding some other content available on the video sharing website. The inter-ministerial committee that was originally constituted to look into the matter, after all, had representation of our intelligence agencies, too. But if these concerns are related to the war on terror, then raising the right issues might make a better case.

Practically speaking, the ban is unwarranted and only damages the prospects of an economic revival. Also, since people have the ability to waylay the ban through the use of virtual private networks, this only gives an opportunity to an invisible traffic that can compromise even the benign motives behind state regulation.

Morally, too, no state has the right to act like a net nanny. It is common sense that a person who finds any content blasphemous will not access it. So, why stymie the prospects of an economic revival? All stakeholders need to keep all of this in mind.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2013.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

COMMENTS (24)

Ghori | 10 years ago | Reply

Pitafi sa'ab you worry needlessly. The Christian West, particularly USA needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs them, and their corrupt and blasphemous Google. They can't afford to abandon a nuclear flashpoint like this region, since Pakistan is their only hope of any chance to save the entire world economy from disaster,should any non-state actor do a nuclear dhamaka to India or to US assets in Afghanistan. Only Pakistan can protect the world from this eventuality.

Kayani sa'ab and Mian sa'ab know this very well, as does Obama and Kerry. So, please stop spreading your secular-liberal defeatism. Pakistan paindabad.

Ahmed bilal | 10 years ago | Reply

@Lala Gee: It is exactly this kind of mentality that is holding our country back. Agar intay hi achay musalman ho to the presence of 'blasphemous' content in the internet should make no difference to those seeking knowledge for the growth and prosperity of our country.

Zara soocho, phir bolo.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ