Amin Al Rasheed
If someone is happy to
say that the 57th section of the controversial (and weird) section of the ICT
Act has been canceled, it will be understood that s/he is in fool of heaven. Two
years ago, I wrote on NTV Online (What is to be done under the Digital Security
Act? January 26, 2016) that, if the article 57 of ICT Act will be
repealed, but a law is coming called the Digital Security Act, where there will
be some worse provisions.
The first draft of the
Digital Security Act came to me in January 2016. Then after reading it
thoroughly, I told a senior government official that I was making this old wine
in the new bottle. He did not agree with me, but claimed, 'when 57 prevails in
the series, the Digital Security Act will at least eliminate that panic. But surprisingly
locked I mean, the Cabinet approved a draft Digital Security Act, there has
been a provision, which was not in the first round of the draft. According to
the new section 32 of this draft, it has been said that if someone enters any
government, semi-government or autonomous organization, it will be an offense
for espionage.
As a result, after
accepting the bill in the cabinet, the media and social media are reacting to
it, it seems that they are more concerned with Article 32 then artile 57 of ICT
act.
It is not hard to
understand that, this article will create a big threat for investigative
journalism. There is a big power of investigative or crime reporting that is
confidential. In many ways, journalists searched for secret things. But now if
the scandal is created in the form of section 32, then the scope of illegal
activities of government-semi-government institutions and illegal activities
will be increased.
In context, the third
draft of the law of the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology is
given in the website, there is no provision in this. A joint secretary of the
Ministry of Information and Communication Technology told me that, they drafted
the law, the cabinet has changed it in many places.
In response to
reporters queries, Commerce Minister Mr. Tofail Ahmed said, "Digital Security
Act has been enacted to protect MPs' standards." He said, the way
journalists report against the MPs in the media, they are not respected. Their
respect is tarnished. They are the public representatives So this law has been
done to stop them. "
It is clear that in the
words of Tofail Ahmed, the freedom of the media or freedom of the country or
freedom of speech is not a factor. Rather, the main purpose of this law is to
honor MPs. Now let's see, when the bill comes into the Parliament, then what is
written for it?
Law Minister Anisul
Haque, however, told journalists about Article 32, "If journalists express
any illegal facts or truth, then it will not be spying or crime. His claim,
that no one's freedom of speech was taken in this Act, nor will there be any
loss of freedom of speech.
Now, what is the
standard of truth? Which is true or not true, which search and spying, who will
determine? Suppose a journalist or a citizen express any information of a
government official's bribery or immoral activities on the Internet, the
alleged public activist will ever confess his crime or if he is accused of
spying for video capture and the publisher, Will be punished?
The main weaknesses of
all of our laws, where the 'innocent crimes committed in good faith' are forgiven,
that is, any crime even if members of the law enforcers are shot dead by a
citizen, they can still get away with it in the court of law, and it is lawful.
In such a terrible reality, the section 32 of the proposed Digital Security Act
will have to think about whether they (government employees) will be more
desperate to be corrupted.
However, there are
considerable reasons for concern over Article 19 of the Digital Security Act.
This section states that if someone publishes or distributes something in the
website or any other electronic format, which is false, obscene and distorted
and corrupted in the human mind, disgraces or social causes; Or if someone
voluntarily publishes or disseminates something on the website or any other
format for the purpose of striking someone's religious feelings, or if someone
reads or views or if he feels hurt in religious feelings, then he will be
punished with imprisonment for a maximum of two years or Two lakh taka can be
fined or punished with both.
That means there is not
much discrepancy in this 19 section of the new law, with the controversial 57
sections of the Information and Communication Technology Act. The difference is
that, in comparison to 57 cases, the amount of punishment is less than 19. If
any person commits an offense under section 57, then there is no provision of
imprisonment for a maximum of 14 years and not less than seven years in prison
and not more than one crore taka. As well as it is ineligible to bail. On the
other hand, if someone commits an offense under Section 19 of the new Act, it
is a bail-in.
The question is being
raised, if the ICT Act is canceled, what will be the cases filed under Article
57? The Cabinet Secretary told the journalists that, since the clause is not
there, the judge's verdict is final. However, the court to remember that there
is no ICT law. The verdict that he gives
will be final. The draft of the Digital Security Act said that as soon as the
law came into effect, 54, 55, 56, 57 sections of the Information and
Communication Technology Act would be repealed and the steps taken under these
sections would be considered under the new law.
It is true that the law
is not final yet. It has been approved in the cabinet, which means that it is
not effective from today. Rather, it will be raised in the parliament by the concerned
minister. If the Speaker permits, then it will go to the Standing Committee on
Ministry of Information and Communication Technology for the examination. After
that the president's of the committee will submit the bill n the form of a
report in Parliament. The concerned minister will then take it in Parliament
for pass the bill. Members of parliament will get the opportunity to discuss
it. Even if the parliament wants it, the bill may be stuck. Although there is
no possibility of it, there is no possibility. Because there is no example in
our parliament. Majority of the members always say 'yes' in favor of bill and,
as important as the bill, it is passed without strong debate for most of the
time. The bill on divide the Dhaka City Corporation has passed to the split
only in 4 minutes.
Still, we can expect
that MPs will debate about the Digital Security Act and the public opinion in
the social media that they are reacting, they (PM) will try to notice and not
make such a controversial law. Even the parliament can discuss with the journalists,
human rights activists and other classes of people on Digital Security Act.
Amin al Rasheed:
Author and journalist
No comments:
Post a Comment