Pakistan Court Declares Mobile Data Disconnections By The Government Illegal
from the connecting-rights dept
In countries that put far less an emphasis on expanding human rights and personal liberty, it's become somewhat common for them to use strong-arm tactics to stifle dissent. One aspect of that is often times the suspension or shutdown of mobile networks, the theory being that the messaging and social media apps dissenters use on their phones allow them to organize far better than they otherwise could and therefore cause more trouble. Frankly, this has become something more expected out of Middle East authoritarian regimes than in other places, but they certainly do not have a monopoly on this practice.
However, there are governments with the ability to reverse course and go back in the right direction. One Pakistani court in Islamabad recently ruled that government shutdown of mobile networks, even if done under some claims for national security, are illegal. The news comes via a translation of a bytesforall.pk report. As a heads up, you will notice that the translation is imperfect.
Bytes for All, Pakistan welcomes the decision by the Honorable Judge of Islamabad High Court, Justice Athar Minallah whereby he declared the network shutdown as illegal and a disproportionate response to security threats.
The judgement reads as, "For what has been discussed above, the instant appeal and the connected petitions are allowed. Consequently, the actions, orders and directives issued by the Federal Government or the Authority, as the case may be, which are inconsistent with the provisions of section 54(3) are declared as illegal, ultra vires and without lawful authority and jurisdiction. The Federal Government or the Authority are, therefore, not vested with the power and jurisdiction to suspend or cause the suspension of mobile cellular services or operations on the ground of national security except as provided under section 54(3)."
If the government follows the directions of the ruling -- a very real question, to be sure -- no longer will federal authorities be able to respond to civil unrest or political activism by simply shutting off phone and data service to large swaths of citizens. It should be obvious that this is the wrong course of action anyway. Taking on a group decrying government oppression by further oppressing large numbers of people doesn't seem like a great formula for political tranquility. Still, it's good to see a government being held to account by the court system.
It seems that the folks at Bytes For All are hoping that this action in Pakistan will be the start of a wider shift in government policy across the region.
"This will set [a precedent], not only in the country but also for the external world wherever States use network disconnections as a tool to suppress fundamental rights in the name of security. Disconnecting people from communication networks is tantamount to denying a set of fundamental rights, including access to information, emergency services, expression and other associated rights," says Shahzad Ahmad, Country Director, Bytes For All, Pakistan.
Whether that actually happens remains to be seen, but if it can be done in Pakistan then surely it can be done elsewhere.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blocks, connectivity, free speech, internet, pakistan
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"if it can be done in Pakistan" -- But it can't! Story over.
Any story that ends with an "IF" is pointless. If you had any sense, you'd see that. [Since this is Techdirt, I'd better add: Yes, that is sarcasm, I KNOW that's doing what I just said not to.]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "if it can be done in Pakistan" -- But it can't! Story over.
"Any story that ends with an if is pointless?" If you rely on common grammatical constructions as your measure of judgement for whether a story has "a point" or not, instead of relying on the evidence backing it up, you're going to wind up with a very skewed collection of what is acceptable and what is not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's okay, blue. It's perfectly okay to grieve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And will anything bad happen to the numerous California mayors, and the governor, for declaring "sanctuary cities" that refuse to abide by US immigration laws? Of course not. Laws are only for the little people.
Middle east governments are not alone, as we can be sure that the US authorities have plans drawn up for cutting any if not all communications whenever deemed necessary, such as in the case of civil unrest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
California is currently being sued for this, and it will be shocking if the US government does not win this case. I have no love for Jeff Sessions, but this case is cut-and-dry, federal law trumps state law.
"we can be sure that the US authorities have plans drawn up for cutting any if not all communications whenever deemed necessary"
Which is illegal under a large number of laws, and equally impossible in a country as developed as ours. Signal jammers of any type are forbidden except for specifically-granted Federal authorities, and turning off cell towers would require cooperation or warrants from AT&T, Verizon, U.S. Cellular, and any other company that controls the towers. That would take a considerable amount of time, and doesn't even start to address wi-fi and satellite internet services.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
*However,* they could certainly countersue claiming that those agencies are unconstitutional, or such a decision might additionally be made in this case. "California has to follow federal laws, but *these* federal laws are unconstitutional", or such.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Details please
Please name some countries that are expanding human rights and personal liberties. Because as fasr as I can tell, almost every country - if not, every country - is becoming a more restrictive police state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Details please
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Details please
Just, watch out for the Nigerian Princes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pick your poison...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]