CSA changes may curtail free speech
The proposed amendments to the Cyber Security Act (CSA) 2026 could increase the risk of harassment against journalists, human rights activists and ordinary citizens while giving government officials greater protection from accountability, the Human Rights Support Society (HRSS) has warned.
In a statement issued on Friday, HRSS Executive Director Ijazul Islam said several proposed changes could threaten freedom of expression, privacy and fundamental rights by introducing new criminal offences, expanding executive powers over online content and granting legal immunity to officials.
He urged the government to review the proposals before finalising the amendments, stressing that their impact should be assessed in terms of both public safety and accountability of state authorities.
Under the proposed amendment to Section 25, the maximum prison sentence for blackmail, sexual harassment, revenge pornography, child sexual abuse material and sextortion would rise from two to five years. The maximum fine would also increase from Tk10 lakh to Tk20 lakh.
If the offences involve women or children below 18, the proposed maximum jail term would increase from five to 10 years, while the fine would rise from Tk20 lakh to Tk40 lakh.
Ijazul welcomed stronger protection for victims but said tougher punishment alone would not prevent cybercrime. He stressed the need for faster investigations, protection of victims, proper preservation of digital evidence and effective trials.
He raised concerns over proposed Sections 25A and 25B, which seek to introduce criminal penalties for online defamation and bullying.
Under Section 25A, online defamation could carry up to two years in prison or a Tk5 lakh fine. Section 25B proposes a maximum three-year jail term or a Tk5 lakh fine for online humiliation and bullying.
Since defamation is already covered by Section 499 of the Penal Code, introducing another criminal provision could create opportunities for harassment cases against journalists, writers, rights activists and ordinary citizens, he said.
He suggested civil remedies for defamation instead of criminal punishment and called for a clear distinction between personal harassment and legitimate public criticism, including political satire, cartoons, memes and parody.
The proposed changes to Section 26 would raise the maximum prison sentence from two to five years for publishing content that incites religious or ethnic hatred and violence. Ijazul said such offences should be addressed, but authorities must consider the intention, context and likelihood of violence before taking action.
Another proposed provision, Section 26A, would make publishing or spreading rumours and misinformation online a criminal offence, punishable by up to five years in prison or a Tk10 lakh fine.
He warned that incorrect or incomplete information should not automatically lead to criminal charges. The law should require evidence of deliberate fabrication, an intention to cause harm and actual damage to prevent its use against government criticism and public-interest journalism.
The proposed changes to Section 8, which deals with removing or blocking online content, also drew concern. They would allow the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and other government-approved agencies to initiate content removal alongside law enforcement agencies.
Ijazul said removing the existing requirements for public disclosure of blocked content and tribunal approval within three days could weaken judicial oversight.
Although the draft allows affected individuals to seek a hearing before the relevant agency, with a decision within 15 days, he questioned whether this would offer sufficient protection.
Information relevant to public interest could lose its value during such a delay, even if the restriction were later withdrawn.
He called for written explanations for blocking decisions, greater transparency, independent judicial supervision and a faster appeals process.
He also objected to proposed changes to Section 29, which would allow authorities to suspend or cancel an organisation’s registration or licence, or stop its activities, over institutional offences.
He warned that the broad definition of a company could expose media outlets, associations, societies and human rights organisations to penalties for offences committed by individuals.
The proposed amendment to Section 46 would make several offences under Sections 25, 25B, 26 and 26A cognisable and non-bailable. According to Ijazul, this could increase the risk of arrest and make securing bail difficult in cases involving freedom of expression.
He also urged the government to extend the proposed protection under Section 46A, requiring prior tribunal approval before arresting journalists working for registered media outlets, to online journalists, ordinary citizens, rights activists and others sharing public-interest information.
A major concern, he said, was proposed Section 52, which would provide civil and criminal immunity to the chairman and members of the National Cyber Security Council, as well as officials and employees performing duties under the law for actions taken in good faith.
He questioned how citizens would seek justice if they were unlawfully detained, harassed or suffered financial and social losses because of official decisions. He said the draft lacked clear provisions for compensation and effective remedies for victims.
Referring to Article 39 of the Constitution and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Ijazul said freedom of expression was a fundamental right and any restriction must meet the tests of necessity and proportionality.
He called for consultations with human rights organisations, journalists, legal experts, technology specialists and civil society representatives before the amendments were finalised.
“Cybersecurity and freedom of expression are not opposing interests,” he said, adding that a democratic state must protect both.
He stressed that the law should bring offenders to justice without turning criticism of the government into a criminal offence.