Journalists, rights activists and politicians on Saturday urged the Tarique Rahman government to abandon proposed changes to the Cyber Protection Ordinance 2025.
They warned that provisions targeting online rumours, disinformation and defamation could revive the machinery of repression used under disgraced and ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.
They also called on the government to place the existing ordinance before parliament without the disputed amendments, arguing that the proposed changes would give authorities sweeping powers to police speech and silence critics.
The warning came at a discussion titled “The Crisis of Freedom of Expression and Democratic System,” organised by human rights organisation Odhikar at the National Press Club in Dhaka.
The debate has acquired urgency amid arrests over social media remarks. Odhikar said 38 people had been arrested for expressing opinions between February 14, when the BNP government took office, and November 13.
Many faced cases over criticism of Prime Minister Tarique Rahman, his family, ministers, lawmakers or the government, according to the organisation.
The proposed amendments would introduce offences involving “rumour,” “disinformation” and “defamatory information,” while leaving provisions against hacking, malware and attacks on critical information infrastructure largely untouched.
An earlier draft proposed up to 10 years in prison for spreading rumours or disinformation. A revised version reduces the maximum sentence to five years and the fine from 4 million taka to 1 million taka. It also proposes special protections for registered media outlets.
Information and Broadcasting Minister Andaleeve Rahman has defended the amendments as necessary to curb disorder on social media and protect social harmony.
But speakers questioned who would decide what constituted a rumour, how broadly the law could be interpreted and whether it would become another instrument for suppressing dissent.
Daily Waadaa editor Shafiqul Alam described Hasina's use of the Digital Security Act as part of an attempt to place Bangladeshi society under pervasive state control.
He said thousands were harassed and hundreds imprisoned under the legislation, which became one of the principal instruments of her government.
“It was a terrible, I would say a totalitarian, experiment,” he said.
Hasina, he argued, had sought to strip Bangladeshis of their voice through an elaborate system of intimidation.
But that experiment ultimately failed.
“Taking away the voice of the whole people of Bangladesh, nobody has been able to do this. Even the Pakistanis could not,” he said.
Shafiqul said the latest round of consultations over the cyber law had already addressed many concerns raised by journalists, particularly those involving expression, rumours and defamation.
“We hope that in the coming days, the remaining concerns being raised by the journalist community or by us, the civil society, will be addressed,” he said.
He also cautioned against treating the state as the only threat to free speech.
Online platforms, he said, had created new forms of intimidation, with individuals facing threats and harassment from non-state actors.
“In Bangladesh, anyone can write or say whatever they like, and can threaten your life at any moment, and they can get away with it. We want an end to this.”
He said powerful private interests were also exploiting freedom of expression to target individuals.
Opposition lawmaker Barrister Mir Ahmad Bin Quasem warned the government against believing that legislation could suppress public anger.
“If law could suppress people's anger through fear, the autocrats would not have fallen in the July revolution,” he said.
“You may delay this anger for a few days, but you cannot stop it.”
Mir Ahmad said the government and opposition were in the same boat in Bangladesh's post-uprising democratic transition. If that transition failed, neither side would escape the consequences.
He urged the government to reject bureaucratic advice that could undermine democratic reforms and implement the referendum verdict, which he said had received support from 70% of voters.
Daily Amar Desh managing editor Zahed Chowdhury delivered a warning to the government.
“The path you are walking will come back at you like a boomerang,” he said.
Speaking as what he described as a well-wisher of the government, Zahed argued that the problem extended beyond the wording of the proposed cyber legislation.
Even a carefully drafted law could become repressive when police and political actors misused it, he said.
He pointed to the arrest of Sathi Akhter and others under laws outside the cyber legislation, including the Anti-Terrorism Act.
“What is the guarantee this won't be done in future?” he asked.
He also raised concerns about pressure from local political leaders on police.
Sathi Akhter, a beauty parlour owner from Bhaluka in Mymensingh, broke down while describing her arrest. “I went to jail without any fault,” she said.
According to Odhikar, electrical wiring was stolen from two rooms of her parlour after an earlier theft involving an air conditioner.
Sathi subsequently posted a remark about having voted for the BNP government only to become a victim of crime.
The comment went viral.
Odhikar alleged that local BNP activists surrounded her shop, after which police took her into custody. A court sent her to jail the following day under Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Sathi said brokers had demanded 200,000 taka to secure her release from the police station. She also alleged that her family had been threatened with further cases that could keep her imprisoned indefinitely.
“I want proper justice from the government,” she said. “What happened to me should not happen to any woman.”
NCP lawmaker Abdullah Al Amin questioned the legal basis of her detention.
Sathi, he said, had the same constitutional rights as any other citizen. If she could not complain about losses at her business, he asked, what remained of freedom of expression?
He said police had invoked Section 151 after a crowd gathered, even though the provision was intended to prevent anticipated breaches of the law.
“Police themselves are abusing the law,” he said.
AB Party General Secretary Barrister Asaduzzaman Fuaad reminded the government that Tarique Rahman himself had faced cases under the Digital Security Act during Hasina's rule.
Those cases involved allegations of insulting Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Bangladesh's independence and the Liberation War, he said.
“See what a tragedy this is,” he said. “What is Tarique Rahman's government doing now!”
Fuaad accused the government of staging a drama over the cyber law and warned that the political consequences could fall hardest on the BNP itself.
“Keep in mind, the consequences will fall mostly on the BNP,” he said.
“Don't you remember history? Won't the movement start again?”
He argued that repressive laws eventually turned against those who introduced or defended them.
“Didn't the Awami League take a beating from its own law? They had to flee the country!”
Syed Abdal Ahmed, principal information officer of the Press Information Department, said the government should not proceed with controversial provisions.
“As far as I know, Prime Minister Tarique Rahman has ordered the cancellation of controversial clauses and for suggestions to be taken from stakeholders,” he said.
“We hope the government will not pass any law that goes against freedom of expression.”
Syed Abdal also expressed dissatisfaction over Sathi's arrest.
His remarks suggested that the proposed legislation remained under review, although the government has yet to publicly settle all the concerns raised by journalists and rights groups.
Odhikar said its records showed 38 arrests over expressions of opinion during the first nine months of BNP rule, with many others facing criminal cases.
The organisation said the allegations frequently involved criticism or derogatory comments about the prime minister, his family, ministers, lawmakers or government policies.
It cited the arrests of Siyat Abdullah in Gazipur on September 3 and Ashraful Islam Sajal in Sreepur on September 26 over social media comments concerning excessive electricity bills.
The organisation also alleged that former NCP leader Gazi Salahuddin Tanvir was tortured by police and prison authorities after being arrested over a Facebook post about the prime minister.
These allegations were presented by Odhikar and were not independently established at the discussion.
For the speakers, the central question was whether Bangladesh's post-uprising government would dismantle the legal instruments once used against its own leaders or preserve them under new names.
They warned that restricting speech through vaguely defined offences would contradict the democratic aspirations of the 2024 uprising.
The government, they argued, should not repeat the methods of the administration it replaced.
—