The Editors' Council (Sampadak Parishad) of Bangladesh, an association formed to protect editorial freedom and promote responsible journalism in the country, has said that the cases filed under Digital Security Act (DSA) should be withdrawn and those already arrested and jailed under this Act should be released.
They said this in a press statement issued on Wednesday over the recent decision taken by the Cabinet to replace the DSA with Cyber Security Act (CSA).
At the same time, the council is waiting to see what the government implements in the CSA.
The council said the government did not take into account the concerns of media stakeholders, including the editorial board, while enacting the Digital Security Act in 2018. It was expected that stakeholders would be consulted and their views taken in amending, repealing or making new laws.
However, without doing anything like that, the government is taking steps to draft the proposed Cyber Security Act and pass it into law, the Editor’s Council stated.
The government has not officially announced the details of the proposed Cyber Security Act. However, from the comments of Law Minister Anisul Huq, the information found in the media, the editorial board cannot be free from fear. Because there does not appear to have been any change other than the reduction of punishment in some cases and the making of non-bailable arrests bailable, the statement said.
For example, Sections 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 32 and 46 of the Digital Security Act were non-bailable. These clauses remain bailable in the proposed Cyber Security Act. If there is no significant difference between the Digital Security Act and the proposed Cyber Security Act, it is pointless to make a new law just by changing the name.
In the case of news coverage, the punishment of journalists in defamation cases has been said to be Tk25 lakh fine instead of imprisonment. Worryingly, the new provision is bound to be ineffective if the penalty for defamation under Penal Code 1860 is not amended.
Secondly, if the fine of Tk25 lakh is not paid, the concerned person will have to undergo imprisonment eventually. The most important thing is that it is natural to question the rationality of these punishments, instead of the ones that exist in the field of journalism.
Sections 21 and 28 of the Digital Security Act are against the freedom of expression at the national and international levels, and as they are considered as a tool to harass and mislead political opponents, there has been a strong demand for their repeal. Keeping these two provisions in place by reducing the punishment will leave room for misuse and arbitrary use.
More worrying is that Section 32 of the Digital Security Act has been left in place. This section retains the colonial-era Official Secrets Act of 1923, although the level of punishment is somewhat reduced. During the colonial period, the ruling group issued the Official Secrets Act because they were suspicious of the people of this country.
On the other hand, under Section 43 of the Digital Security Act, police are empowered to enter homes, search offices, search people's bodies and seize everything related to computers, computer networks, servers and digital platforms.
The police can arrest any person on suspicion without a warrant. This has practically given the police a kind of “judicial power”, which is in no way acceptable. Since this section also remains in force, the new Cyber Security Act cannot be considered as something new.
“We also want punishment for crimes committed through digital or cyber. But to ensure that the proposed Cyber Security Act does not become a tool to take away the freedom of the press like the Digital Security Act, we think it is necessary to discuss it with the stakeholders of the media before finalizing it,” the statement added.
