Practically, no government can work in the present day world without freedom of speech and freedom of the media as basic right of its citizens is to know the functions of the government. Today's world is more interconnected than ever before. Yet, for all its advantages, increased connectivity brings increased risk of high-tech crimes, including cyber-based terrorism, espionage, computer intrusions and cyber fraud since we are building our lives around our wired and wireless networks. Witnessing high trend of cyber crime, almost every country has some sort of laws against cyber crime or Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act. And there is nothing wrong in it, but the question is what should be in the law, how the law should be applied, or who should be identified as law breakers?
Those who believe that without free flow of information and truth disseminated by different media the future of democracy would be threatened, became frustrated as the Awami League-led grand alliance government recently approved the draft of the ICT (Amendment) Ordinance-2013. Analysts are of the opinion that the proposed draft, approved by the cabinet and awaiting final review to be enacted into law, would further blacken the original Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act-2006, adopted by the then Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP)-Jamaat government, as it would abolish the provision of bail and increase punishment from 7-14 years in prison. The proposed draft would make non-cognisable offences in the existing law cognisable and provide law enforcement agencies with unrestricted power to arrest any person suspected of breaking the law without issuing warrant.
The existing and proposed draft of ICT Act have lot of provisions to protect cyber crimes which include destroying computer data with malicious intent, transferring data without proper authority, hacking, spreading pornography etc. But some of the recent incidents - the arrest of Amar Desh acting editor Mahmudur Rahman, human rights organisation Odhikar's Secretary Adilur Rahman, bloggers Asif Mohiuddin, Mashiur Rahman Biplob, Subrata Adhikari Shuvo and Rasel Parvez under the ICT act seem to demonstrate that the government is more interested to go against those who had their own views or opinions, or who, according to the government, released defaming information that put the government in a tough situation.
Cybercrimes and other related activities have to be closely identified. Article 57 of the draft Law defines as crime willful release on websites or any other electronic platform any material which is false, vulgar or which can motivate someone or defame someone, cause deterioration of law and order or tarnish the image of the state or individuals or hurt religious sentiments. So, the question is: how would the government determine whom to be brought under the Law? During last February, we witnessed that the government was first lenient to the bloggers who were involved in the Shahbag movement demanding death penalty of all war criminals. But later, the government went against some of the same bloggers while they were believed to hurt religious sentiments. It seems the government will have to wait until public response to any published views or opinions is received to determine who would be prosecuted under this Act. This, we believe, is not the appropriate method to address cyber crimes.
Now the main problem is that the draft poses threats to freedom of expression, which is a basic foundation of democracy and is considered as one of the most fundamental aspects of all kinds of freedom. It is not only the people of Bangladesh but people around the world are now living at a time when freedom of expression is persecuted from all possible angles. It is okay to be supporter of any particular party and its ideologies, but disagreeing with the interest of that party (and if that happens to be the ruling party) must not mean you are against the interest of the government and the country. Unfortunately, reality often presents a reversal of how things should be. The ruling parties seem to forget that you can be for many things and against many things, and the connections do not have to connect. There are more rules, regulations and surveillance now available on what you should say, how you should say it and where you should say it. If everything goes well on what you say, you are good to go. But if not, you will be brought to book.
Presence of freedom of expression means guarantee for every individual to write and speak openly without any interference by the government. People can inform the public, advocate for an alternative idea and provide an opinion about what they think is right or wrong. Freedom of expression also secures other important fundamentals of democracy like pluralism and free, fair and regular election. Without freedom of expression, political parties also cannot campaign properly which can lead to unfair competition during elections. So, to ensure democracy for all, freedom of expression is very important.
In addition to the incompatibility with the freedom of expression, the draft, according to experts, would not be able to tackle cyber crimes. Technology is changing overnight. Recently, security expert Khalil Shreateh from Palestine discovered a glitch that allows anyone to post to a stranger's Facebook wall. He hacked into Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook page to expose the site's vulnerability. It means tracking the alleged person could be difficult or at times impossible. The draft does not cover a majority of crimes committed through mobile phones. The law considers emails as evidence, which conflicts with the country's evidence act.
From previous experiences we witnessed that in most of the cases whenever the government of Bangladesh enacted a new law or amended an existing law, the objective was often motivated by political interests. If this be the case with the draft ICT Law, there would be miseries difficult to mitigate.
Yes, the law should have provisions which empower the government to tackle the growing number of cyber crimes. Now, the larger point is that to address this important issue, government should have consulted with all the stakeholders and come clean by drafting such rules so they do not intervene with fundamental rights like freedom of speech or expression.
---
Autor(en)/Author(s): Ripan Kumar Biswas
Quelle/Source: Financial Express Bangladesh, 25.08.2013
Bitte besuchen Sie/Please visit:
