Freedom Of Expression And The Debate On VPNs In Pakistan

Ishtiaq  Ahmed

Bradford: Freedom of expression is fundamental to any democratic society. Democracies worldwide place significant importance on privacy and anonymity in both personal and professional contexts.

These principles underpin a vast array of governmental, non-governmental, and business relationships. While censorship may occasionally serve a purpose, in most cases, it stifles the open exchange of ideas and debates, inadvertently fostering underground movements and undesirable developments.

It is, therefore, perplexing for Pakistan’s Council of Islamic Ideology (CII)—the highest body of Islamic clerics—to declare the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) contrary to Islamic law. This stance appears to be a draconian and regressive reaction to technological advancements that much of the world has embraced.

The Council’s Position and Its Implications

Raghib Naeemi, chairman of the CII, has argued that under Shariah, the government is permitted to prevent actions that lead to the “spread of evil.” He suggested that platforms hosting content deemed controversial, blasphemous, or harmful to national integrity should be shut down immediately. This assertion raises critical questions about the council’s intent and the desirability of its recommendations.

For instance, what are the parameters of the phrase “spread of evil”? If the argument is that any medium susceptible to misuse or abuse should be banned, then books, newspapers, television, mobile phones, and the internet—all of which can potentially disseminate falsehoods would also fall under this reasoning. This creates a slippery slope that the council should carefully avoid.

Read More: https://thepenpk.com/good-morning-motivating-or-tedious/

Similarly, the term “controversial” is also highly subjective. Differences in opinion on matters of faith, politics, business, governance, or social cohesion are often deemed controversial. Criticism of governmental institutions, for example, can easily be labelled as such. Yet, healthy controversies are vital for any democracy and drive progress through debate and discussion.

Moreover, the term “blasphemy” has historically been open to misinterpretation and misuse, often leading to severe consequences. The council’s blanket approach risks further alienating critics of Islam and providing ammunition for those who seek to misrepresent the faith.

The Broader Context: Technology and Freedom

The timing of the council’s statement is troubling, coinciding with government attempts to restrict internet-based services ahead of PTI’s planned protest day, likely to hinder nationwide mobilisation. Such actions reflect an undemocratic and authoritarian approach.

Technology, by itself, cannot be labelled as halal or haram—it is the intent and manner of its use that determine its ethical standing.

The government claims it seeks to ban VPNs to combat militancy. Critics, however, argue that this move is part of broader efforts to suppress freedom of expression. VPNs, while legal in most countries, are often restricted in nations that prioritizse online surveillance and censorship.

Virtual private networks allow users to maintain privacy, security, and access to restricted online content. In Pakistan, VPNs enable citizens to navigate around internet blocks and access platforms like X (formerly Twitter), which has been largely inaccessible since February’s controversial elections.

Read More: https://thepenpk.com/understanding-islamophobia-in-british-and-european-context/

The Council’s Recommendations and Their Consequences

The council claims VPNs are used to access content that contravenes Islamic principles, such as immoral or illegal websites.

It describes such use as “abetting in sin.” Additionally, authorities allege that terrorists exploit VPNs to facilitate violent activities and financial transactions. These concerns warrant attention but must be addressed through a proportionate, nuanced approach rather than broad bans.

Pakistan’s Army Chief, General Asim Munir, recently advocated for stricter regulation of online speech, stating that unrestricted freedom of expression contributes to societal degradation.

While maintaining security and safeguarding societal values are legitimate goals, these require a comprehensive review of existing systems, including law enforcement, judicial mechanisms, and technology frameworks. Piecemeal or reactive measures will not suffice.

Addressing the Root Causes

The CII’s concerns about moral degradation in society are valid, but the focus must shift from

to root causes. For decades, Pakistan has failed in nation-building efforts, leaving many deprived of meaningful education, economic opportunities, and hope.

The lack of character-building initiatives, coupled with widespread poverty and systemic neglect, has driven much of society into despair. Rebuilding trust and moral integrity requires a collective effort involving the government, religious leaders, educators, and other stakeholders.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while addressing immoral and harmful activities is important, a blanket ban on VPNs is not the solution.

Such measures risk infringing on fundamental freedoms and undermining public trust. The Council of Islamic Ideology should take a broader, more thoughtful approach, focusing on education, poverty alleviation, and trust-building to address societal challenges. Only through such holistic efforts can the nation move toward moral and social rejuvenation.

The author is a British citizen of Pakistani origin with a keen interest in Pakistani and international affairs.

The article is the writer’s opinion, it may or may not adhere to the organization’s editorial policy.