News Desk :
The Sampadak Parishad (Editors’ Council) on Saturday demanded that steps be taken immediately to follow-up on the law minister’s assurance that the Digital Security Act would be reviewed.
The minister had said the law would be reviewed during a recent interview with the BBC.
Welcoming the law minister’s statement of reviewing the Digital Security Act, where he said “no arrests would be made before any investigation”, the Editors’ Council in a statement said, “We demand that steps be taken immediately to make the statement of the law minister legally effective. We demand necessary ordinance or legal initiative for this immediately.”
The statement, signed by Mahfuz Anam, president of Sampadak Parishad, said that journalists and free speech advocates were being constantly harassed and tortured for protesting digital security laws: “It is no exaggeration to say that in some cases, the implementation of the Digital Security Act is more concerning than we fear. Mushtaq Ahmed, a free-spirited writer, had to prove it with his life.”
The statement also thanked the court for granting bail to cartoonist Kishore, but mentioned that there had been complaints of him being tortured. “Earlier, internationally renowned photographer Shahidul Alam was also tortured, which he himself alleged,” the statement said, adding, “It must be mentioned here that journalist Kajol had been missing and then in jail for a long time just for sharing an article on social media.”
It also highlighted the struggles of those who, while having gotten bail, were still having to deal with cases, saying, “Although he was granted bail, cases against him are ongoing; Kajol, who is financially and physically disadvantaged, has to deal with the cases. Though Kishore, who is physically ill, got bail and was released from jail, he still has to continue with the case. It is very difficult to deal with a case in such a situation.”
The Parishad also recommended to include various stakeholders in the formulation of the law and pointed out that demands had been made earlier to cancel certain sections of the act.
“Earlier, we, the Sampadak Parishad, mentioned the objectionable sections of the Digital Security Act and demanded cancellation of those sections. If our demands were considered, we would not have faced the current situation,” the statement said.
“Now we think that just reviewing or amending the Digital Security Act will not solve the problem. We think its time to do away with the Digital Security Act altogether. We urge the government to consider the matter with sensitivity.
“By the implementation of this law, the image of our country is being tarnished nationally and internationally. It’s not happening through the words or writings of those against whom the law is being applied,” the statement added.
Mentioning that there were questions on how crimes on digital platforms would be dealt with without having a relevant law, the statement said there were already laws in place which could be used.
“The question that might arise, if there is no digital security law, which law can be used to take action against crimes occurring on digital platforms?
“These crimes can be prosecuted under the existing laws of the country and the Information Technology Act of 2006. Apart from this, a new section can be added to this on the basis of the recommendations of a committee comprising expert lawyers of the country. However, the opinion of the media representatives must be taken into consideration in this case,” it said.
“According to Article 19, a UK-based media watchdog, 457 people were prosecuted and arrested in 198 cases under the Digital Security Act in 2020. Of them, 75 are journalists.
“We are not against such a law in principle. Those who commit criminal acts on digital platforms must be brought to justice, but the law should not be applied to suppress the media and free-spirited writers.
“We also demand the immediate release of all those arrested and jailed under the Digital Security Act and the withdrawal of all cases. We expect the government to be prudent,” the statement concluded.
