Facebook could be fined up to Tk 3b for failing to comply with govt orders

Suppose an individual publishes a content on Facebook deemed to be against national unity and solidarity, or treasonous in the government’s view.

This offence would be non-bailable and the individual could be punished accordingly. But the liability would not rest solely with the person.

The social media platform they will post it on, such as Facebook, would be ordered by the government to remove the content. If the platform failed to do so right away it could be fined up to Tk 3 billion (Tk 300 crore).

Such provisions are included in the draft of the Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulation (Amendment) Ordinance 2025. The Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC) has sent this proposal to the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications already. However, it is still in the proposal stage and has not been finalised yet.

During the ousted Awami League government’s term, social media platforms were kept under strict surveillance. Controversial provisions of the Information and Communication Technology Act, the Digital Security Act, and the Cyber Security Act were used to control people’s freedom of speech online. Several elements of the BTRC’s new proposal appear similar in nature.

Free speech and technology rights advocates say that if such provisions are retained in the law, the same scope for misuse would be created as before.

On 28 July, the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications instructed the BTRC to prepare proposals for amending and updating the Telecommunications Act 2001. In response, the BTRC submitted a proposal to the ministry last Tuesday, suggesting a number of amendments to it.

The proposal calls for repealing the amendments to the Telecommunications Act 2001 from 2010, which would remove the ministry’s scope to intervene in BTRC’s activities.

Notable additions in the proposal include: eliminating the provision allowing internet shutdowns, making interception of communications subject to consultation with the relevant ministry, bringing social media, digital platforms, and OTT services under the scope of the law, authorising the collection and review of telecommunications network traffic and internet data to ensure cyber security, and allowing band sharing, sale, or leasing with BTRC approval.

Section 66 of the existing law has been amended in the proposal to include digital or electronic media alongside telecommunications or wireless equipment under the regulation of offences and penalties. This means that sharing or publishing false or fraudulent information via digital or electronic media would be a punishable offence.

The proposed amendment to Section 66A states that sending, any signal, message, or content that is against national unity and solidarity, treasonous, incites hatred, division, or unrest, harms the country’s sovereignty or defence, damages friendly relations with foreign states, threatens public order, creates fear, or causes financial loss through telecommunications, wireless equipment, digital or electronic media will be a punishable offence. The penalty would be up to 5 years’ imprisonment, a fine of Tk 3 billion (Tk 300 crore), or both.

The proposal further states regarding the same section that if any person, intermediary, or social media platform engages in or facilitates such actions, and the government instructs the BTRC in writing to take measures, the commission may, without giving any explanation, instruct telecommunications service providers or social media platforms to block or remove the relevant signals, messages, or content.

If the instructions are not followed immediately, the service provider may face up to 5 years’ imprisonment, a Tk 3 billion (Tk 300 crore) fine, or both. The term ‘government’ here refers to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Defence or, as applicable the relevant ministry.

The proposal designates Section 66A as non-bailable. However, it would be negotiable under certain conditions, such as payment of compensation and administrative fines.

Speaking in this regard Sabhanaz Rashid Diya, executive director of international technology rights research organisation, Tech Global Institute, told Prothom Alo that keeping Section 66A non-bailable would be inappropriate, as such provisions could be misused in the same way as before. She pointed out that people were imprisoned under the pretext of anti-state statement in the three now-defunct laws.

Sabhanaz Rashid Diya sees the principle of holding social media platforms accountable as positive, but noted that the proposal’s requirement to treat non-compliance with immediate takedown orders as a criminal offence is inconsistent and almost impossible to enforce.

She further stated that the proposal’s provisions regarding false or misleading information under Section 66 conflict with international standards on freedom of expression, and would create opportunities for misuse.

Two of the most controversial aspects of the existing law are the power to shut down telecommunications (i.e., the internet) and the unrestricted ability of government agencies to intercept communications. After the fall of the Awami League government, there were strong calls for these provisions to be repealed or amended.

The ministry’s instruction to BTRC on amending and updating the law also mentioned these issues specifically. It stated that the law must be revised to ensure that no one from the government or from the private sector can shut down the internet, and that provisions on interception must be brought in line with international standards.

The instruction also acknowledged concerns about the legal validity of the National Telecommunication Monitoring Centre (NTMC). The BTRC’s proposal recommends abolishing the provision on shutting down telecommunications services. However, the provision on interception remains the same as before.

In a letter sent along with the proposal to the ministry, the BTRC stated that legally interception is a matter of security and law enforcement, and that Section 97A of the current law could be restructured in consultation with the Ministry of Home Affairs and other security-related authorities.

It suggested that clear provisions could be added to balance security and privacy, defining the scope of interception, as well as the responsibilities, powers, and procedures for relevant authorities, individuals, and organisations.

Speaking on this issue, Tech Global Institute executive director Sabhanaz Rashid Diya said her organisation’s research has found evidence of inconsistencies and overreach in the interception provision.

She emphasised that such matters should not be left solely to the Ministry of Home Affairs or the relevant ministry, and that there needs to be proper consultation with civil society, human rights organisations, the private sector, and other stakeholders.