Q :
How do you view that the Cyber Security Act being enacted by changing the name of the Digital Security Act?
Citizens expected the Act to be completely repealed. Because it is a law which is incredibly oppressive and repressive. The citizens desired freedom from the law. However, it turned out that only some of the law’s provisions were being amended merely for show; the law itself is not repealed. The fundamental human rights of the citizens won’t be significantly protected by this change.
Q :
Why would the Act not come in handy?
The reason is that under this Act, the accused is harassed for the first three to four months after the case is filed. After that, when the bail is granted, then the case has to be attended, the cases get dragged on for years, many times the witness does not come, even if the witness comes, there is no information regarding the complainant. There is no incident of sentencing in the case before the High Court Division. Therefore, citizens will not have rights or protection in case of reduction or increase of sentence, or change in the level of sentence. And the harassment and suffering of people under the Act will not be over.
Defamation-related laws concerning imprisonment are being abolished. Therefore, no one will be detained. How do you see the matter?
Defamation is not considered a criminal offence in the civilised countries of the world. There were, and are, movements in various civilised countries to decriminalise defamation, which is a struggle for freedom of expression. In Bangladesh, it is often seen that defamation cases are filed against institutions. Defamation cannot be against an institution in any legal system of the world. The new upcoming Cyber Security Act in Bangladesh states that the maximum penalty for defamation is Tk 2.5 million. It is beyond the financial capacity of an ordinary journalist or civil society representative to pay this fine through honest earnings.
Q :
Law minister Anisul Huq has said the provision of bail has been added to different sections of the draft law. How do you view this?
In theory, I have no complaint about the provision of bail. I had a complaint over the application of the law, as when a case is filed, bailable provisions are tagged with non-bail provisions. Therefore, even if the non-bailable section is reduced from 14, it will not be of any use to the accused from the practical point of law.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights office recommended to amend 8 sections and to completely repeal two sections of the Digital Security Act. Has the recommendation of the UN been adopted?
As a citizen, I have not yet received a copy of the draft of the new Act. The UN recommended one and a half to two years ago and the question is, with whom did the UN make that recommendation? The situation was violent then and still is. A case has been filed in the name of a 78-year-old journalist, in the name of a child. Cases have been filed against teachers, students and artists. This is not only sad, it is actually unfair.
Q :
There are many unclear words and sections in the Digital Security Act. We have not heard any commitment to clarify those. What will you say about this?
These issues have been discussed, and we have given our views in writing about these issues and have written in the newspapers. In an in-person meeting, they took notes and said that they would respond. Did they respond? Did they invite us for the second time? They didn’t, because the matters were never within their consideration.
The draft of the Cyber Security Act will be placed in parliament in September. But a demand has been raised to discuss the matter among the stakeholders.
There has been no discussion with us over the draft of the Cyber Security Act. The Civil Society has not received a copy of the draft. I have heard that the information and communication technology division has prepared the draft. Without discussing it with the stakeholders, they placed it in the cabinet meeting and sent it to the law ministry. Later it will be placed and passed in parliament.
Legislation is not valid, perhaps legally correct, unless it is made in a participatory, transparent and impartial and corruption-free and accountable process. But the citizens of Bangladesh will not accept it.
Another matter is the word ‘security’ should not be there in the Cyber Security Act. If we use this word, we feel insecure. It should have been a cyber protection law or cyber protection act for citizens, providing political, economic, social and cultural protection. It didn’t actually happen.
Q :
It has been said, the cases filed earlier under the Digital Security Act will continue. How do you view this?
There are two things here. When a law is repealed and if it is oppressive, the state apologises to the citizens if the state admits that it is oppressive and changes it. Interacts with the victim, negotiates and works to remedy the loss of his political, economic, social and cultural rights. But Bangladesh has so far not acknowledged that the law is an oppressive one, detrimental to political, economic, social and cultural rights. If a state is not human rights friendly, it can sue people even under the repealed law. Is Bangladesh that sort of a state?
Q :
How would the proposed new law be a relief instead of the Digital Security Act?
In fact it is not a relief, it has created mental pressure on the citizens. Many people thought that the cases filed against their brothers, sisters and fathers would be dropped. But they realised after a few hours that the law was not repealed, but changed, which disappointed the citizens again.