Prepare to be criminalised

Yes, we need legislation aginst cybercrime but that does not mean we sign up to yet another layer of state censorship

As you may be aware our esteemed government is trying to steamroller through a piece of legislation that if it becomes law is going to potentially impact on every one of us that uses the internet. And that is a lot of people nowadays. The Cyber Crime Bill that parliament is to decide on is a very unpleasant beast indeed and likely to land a lot of people and that includes potentially you and me, in a lot of trouble.

There are several versions of the draft Bill currently in circulation, each differing in detail, quite significantly so in some instances thus what follows comes with a health warning — I am not 100 per cent sure that the version I am using as a source for this column is the version that is going to be decided upon by parliamentarians. Apologies in advance for any errors.

Firstly and perhaps most importantly, the Bill describes sweeping powers of censorship, allowing the government to block access to or remove speech from not only the internet but via any device, and that includes your phone. What is more, such action is to be at the discretion of the ‘investigator’ and there is no requirement that they seek permission to act via a court of law.

Using your tablet in your favourite coffee shop that provides Wi-Fi? Under Section 29 of the draft bill ‘Retention of Traffic data’ the definition of ‘service provider’ has been expanded to include any place that offers internet access to the general public which will include your own office if it runs an intranet, airports, restaurants and hotels — and all required to retain traffic data. Think about the implications of that one, Dear Reader.

Then consider spamming, as does Section 22 of this behemoth. Spam may be a pain in the proverbial neck but nowhere in the world is spamming an offence — but it will be in Pakistan. We deal with spam via the filters we install on our devices, but for those sending unsolicited messages without prior and “express” permission from the recipient welcome to the wonderful world of criminality.

Cyberstalking is a very real problem and Section 21 of the draft Bill refers to “obscene” or “immoral” messages on social media such as Facebook or Twitter, but does not define either. No more of that edgy banter, no more flirtatious messages between two people entirely happy and comfortable with flirting with one another in public cyberspace.

It is not all bad news, and Section 13 “special protection of women” is to be welcomed and even though the section is not particularly well written it does at least provide women who feel they have been victimised or abused to have recourse to the law. I know of several women who have been abused and threatened, their images manipulated and not in a nice way.

The version of the draft Bill I have cherry-picked from above runs to 43 pages of dense text and a page supposedly authored by Anusha Rahman Khan, Minister of State for Information Technology. Her “Statement of objects and reasons” reads like common sense in many ways, and she is right when she says that a whole new range of offences has emerged relating to cyberspace that are not covered by existing legislation.

But have a care. What is being smuggled-in under the radar is a loosely worded but sweeping catchall that arrogates unprecedented powers to the state, places responsibilities on individuals and businesses everywhere no matter their purpose or legitimacy and has the potential to criminalise a host of innocent internet and communication device owners. You and me.

High-falutin’ claims by the supporters of the Bill that the institutions of state will not misuse their powers are stuff and nonsense. The state has shown itself to be duplicitous, deceitful and corrupt on innumerable occasions since Partition and this Bill if it becomes law unmodified from its current format is a happy hunting ground for those who wish to bend its powers to their own ends and purposes. Yes, we need legislation that allows cybercrime and terrorism to be effectively countered, but that does not mean we all sign up to yet another layer of state censorship.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 23^rd,  2015.

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