No Legislation Can Be Allowed to Silence the Media

During the ousted Awami League government, the controversial Digital Security Act 2018 and Cyber Security Act 2023 were introduced to restrict freedom of expression. These laws were widely misused, preventing the media from reporting freely. Newspapers and journalists faced lawsuits, harassment and imprisonment over their reports, regardless of their accuracy and objectivity. Some journalists were even killed for publishing news, while writers were also targeted.

International organisations strongly condemned these restrictions on press freedom, but the Awami League government ignored the criticism.

After the fall of the government in the mass uprising, the interim government repealed the law and introduced the Cyber Protection (Amendment) Act 2026. The law aims to prevent cybercrime, improve cybersecurity, protect citizens and secure critical digital and national infrastructure. It covers offences such as hacking, digital fraud, online sexual harassment and revenge pornography. It also seeks to prevent unauthorised access to and destruction of data belonging to important public and private infrastructure.

The law also aims to strengthen cybersecurity through the National Cyber Security Agency, the National Cyber Emergency Response Team (NCERT) and digital forensic laboratories. It includes provisions for resolving cases within a specific period through cyber tribunals.

However, media representatives have raised serious concerns about some provisions of the new law. At a recent consultation meeting organised by the government to review the draft Cyber Protection (Amendment) Act 2026, representatives of print and electronic media warned about the risk of misuse and called for further amendments. They also demanded the formation of a media commission to address issues concerning the press.

Daily Manab Zamin Editor-in-Chief Matiur Rahman Chowdhury warned that Bangladesh could become a huge prison if the law were passed without changes. He said several terms in the proposed law lacked clear definitions, creating opportunities for misuse.

Questioning the provision for mobile courts, he said that immediately punishing a reporter after the publication of a report would raise serious concerns about press freedom. He also questioned how such a provision had been included in a law concerning cybersecurity and the media.

He urged the government not to restrict the media, warning that doing so would ultimately harm the government itself. He stressed that a law intended to punish cybercriminals should not damage the media.

2. Government Assures Media of Protection

At a meeting with journalists, Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmed said the government did not intend to target the media through the Cyber Protection Act or allow journalists to become victims of its misuse.

He said the government wanted to introduce a law that would protect people from cybercrimes, which were spreading rapidly across society.

The minister also supported the proposal to require court approval before taking action against or arresting journalists. He said the proposal would be included if the committee drafting the law recommended it.

The government’s position is encouraging, and the concerns raised by media representatives are also reasonable. The unclear terms and provisions that could be misused must be revised.

The experience of the ousted Awami League government shows why such changes are necessary. Although it promised to amend the Digital Security Act, it failed to make meaningful changes. Discussions with pro-government journalists did not lead to effective reform. Instead, the law became a tool for suppressing freedom of expression and harassing journalists.

Daily Inqilab was among the major victims. After publishing detailed reports on corruption involving then-powerful minister Shajahan Khan and a police official, the newspaper’s office was attacked and vandalised. Cases under the Digital Security Act were filed against its Editor and Publisher, A. M. M. Bahaunddin, its news editor, chief reporter and the reporter concerned.

Law enforcement personnel searched and ransacked the office before arresting the news editor, chief reporter and reporter in the middle of the night. The publication of Inqilab was also suspended, an unprecedented incident in the country’s newspaper history.

The newspaper had published responses from Shajahan Khan and the police official concerned in line with journalistic practice. Nevertheless, the pressure continued, creating fear throughout the newspaper industry.

Media outlets that published factual reports outside the government-aligned narrative increasingly resorted to self-censorship. Newspapers were expected to publish reports praising the government’s achievements, while journalists who dared to report critically faced lawsuits, arrest and imprisonment.

Many journalists were killed by Awami League cadres, while some died in prison. Writer Mushtaq Ahmed died at Kashimpur Jail on February 24, 2021, after being arrested under the law. Noted photojournalist Shafiqul Islam Kajol spent a long period in prison. Intelligence officials also summoned journalists and intimidated them.

3. Fighting Cybercrime Without Restricting Press Freedom

Information and Broadcasting Minister Andalib Rahman Partho has said the Cyber Protection Act will be designed to benefit everyone, including government officials and journalists. This assurance is welcome, but it must be reflected in practice.

At the same time, the widespread use of social media has increased the spread of fake news, misinformation, disinformation, rumours and attacks on people’s reputations. Prime Minister Tarique Rahman and his daughter, Zaima Rahman, have also been targeted by offensive fake photo cards.

False and misleading content can spread within moments, and many people believe it without checking the facts. Such content can seriously damage the personal, family and social reputations of politicians and other prominent individuals.

Cybercriminals also use fake identity cards to cheat people, steal personal information and data, and blackmail victims. Although people should be free to express their opinions on social media, using that freedom to spread false information and damage others’ reputations is a serious concern.

Such activities can create family conflicts and social problems. Some people also spread false information while criticising the government, damage reputations, provoke public anger, create instability and engage in activities against the state. These problems need to be addressed.

Developed countries also take action against illegal content, false information and hate speech while protecting freedom of expression. Major platforms such as Meta, Google and X face regulatory obligations and possible penalties in various jurisdictions if they fail to address certain violations.

However, protecting people from online abuse must not become an excuse to control independent journalism.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits Congress from making laws that restrict freedom of speech or of the press. European countries also protect these freedoms through their constitutions and human rights frameworks. Article 5 of Germany’s Basic Law protects freedom of expression and the press while recognising certain legal limits.

In developed countries, governments are not supposed to directly control or silence the media. However, journalists and media organisations can face legal action under general laws concerning defamation, copyright violations, privacy and election rules. Press councils also help maintain professional ethics and standards in many countries.

4. Protecting People Without Silencing Journalists

In today’s social media era, false information, hate speech and obscene videos or photo cards can spread rapidly. Even if such content is removed, screenshots and saved copies can be used for harmful purposes later.

Therefore, effective cybersecurity laws are necessary. However, established print, online and electronic news organisations generally follow professional standards and editorial rules.

If individuals, institutions or government authorities object to published reports, they can seek remedies through responses or rebuttals, the Press Council or the ordinary legal system.

Ideally, the media should not be included in the Cyber Protection Act in a way that threatens press freedom. If inclusion becomes necessary, the government must consider the opinions of media representatives and address their concerns.

Otherwise, the law could become a tool for harassing, imprisoning and silencing journalists, continuing the repressive practices of the ousted government.

A law designed to protect cyberspace must never become a tool for silencing the media.