IHC journalists’ association challenges Peca tweaks

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court Journalists Association (IHCJA) on Monday challenged the incumbent government’s amendments to the controversial Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) in the capital’s high court.

The petition argues that the Peca Amendment Act was an “attack on press freedom” and requests a judicial review. The petitioner’s lawyer also urged the court to form a larger bench to hear the case.

The petition argues that the appointment of an authority and tribunal under Peca falls under government jurisdiction. It further states that the Peca Amendment Act 2025 violates Articles 19 and 19A of the Constitution.

The petition further claims that the law grants the government unlimited censorship powers, severely infringes on digital rights and that the regulatory authority under Peca has no constitutional standing.

Acting IHC Chief Justice Sarfaraz Dogar directed that the case be linked with other pending petitions before Justice Inam Amin Minhas. He further stated that Justice Minhas would decide on the request for a larger bench.

During the hearing, the acting chief justice inquired about the schedule for the case, to which Advocate Mian Samiuddin responded that the case before Justice Minhas had been postponed for two weeks. The development comes after the ruling coalition bulldozed the controversial amendments in the National Assembly and the Senate. Opposition parties, journalists and media bodies decried the lack of consultation before the passing of the amendments.

The law, which has now come into effect following President Asif Ali Zardari’s assent, provisions new definitions, the establishment of regulatory and investigative bodies, and stricter penalties for disseminating “false” information.

The new amendments lowered the punishment for spreading “fake information” online to three years while the offender could also face a fine of up to Rs2 million. The new amendments also proposed the establishment of the Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority (SMPRA), the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) and the Social Media Protection Tribunal.

Furthermore, it stated, that any person “aggrieved by fake and false information” can approach the authority for removal or blocking access to such information and the authority would issue orders no later than 24 hours on the request.

The fresh changes also stated that the authority might require any social media platform to enlist with it in any manner, form and on payment of such fee as may be prescribed. Additionally, the new amendments also proposed the constitution of a Social Media Complaint Council to receive and process complaints made by aggrieved parties against violation of any provision of the cybercrime law. It also proposed the establishment of Social Media Protection Tribunals that will resolve cases within 90 days, with appeals allowed to the Supreme Court within 60 days.