Cyber Protection Ordinance 2024: Safeguard or Threat? Experts Call for Amendment

The Proposed Cyber Protection Ordinance 2024 must emphasize inclusivity, transparency, and accountability to protect the rights of all citizens, particularly marginalized communities. Clear provisions, robust safeguards, and meaningful stakeholder engagement are crucial to ensure it fosters security without repeating the misuse and repression associated with previous laws.

The Institute of Informatics and Development (IID), in collaboration with BLAST, Cyber Teens Foundation, and Safety Net, organized a roundtable discussion titled “Proposed Cyber Protection Ordinance 2024” on January 12, 2025, at Bishwo Shahitto Kendro in Dhaka. The event highlighted the pressing need for a framework that ensures the rights and safety of vulnerable groups while preventing misuse of power.

Syeed Ahamed, Chief Executive of IID, moderated the session, emphasizing the importance of addressing flaws in the ordinance. He remarked, “The ambiguity in defining offenses and the excessive powers granted to enforcement agencies remain unchanged in the new draft. These gaps have historically led to misuse and must be addressed to ensure a fair and effective legal framework.”

Calls for Inclusive Legislation

Monisha Biswas, Senior Research Officer at BLAST, provided historical context on previous cyber-related laws, underscoring the lack of stakeholder engagement in drafting the ordinance. She pointed out procedural gaps that raise concerns about its effectiveness and fairness.

Barrister Priya Ahsan Chowdhury, also from BLAST, flagged ambiguities in clauses related to freedom of expression, particularly under Sections 25 and 26. She stated, “Provisions allowing warrantless search, seizure, and content removal need immediate procedural reform to ensure accountability and align with international legal standards.”

Focus on Marginalized Communities

The discussion included voices from marginalized groups. Sharmin Akhter, a member of the National Council for Disabled Women, highlighted the harassment disabled individuals face under existing laws. She called for accessible digital platforms and services, alongside law enforcement officers trained in sign language and inclusive practices, to ensure better protection.

Puja Rani, a community mobilizer for the Dalit Women Forum, shared that Dalit women often fall victim to online harassment but face systemic barriers in seeking legal redress. She recommended deploying specialized cybercrime officers in every police station to address complaints effectively.

Advocate Hamidul Mezbah of the Supreme Court critiqued the ordinance’s amalgamation of three existing frameworks—ICT Law, Cyber Security Law, and Data Protection Law. “The ordinance attempts to cover too many areas, creating a complex structure that could hinder effective implementation,” he explained.

Concerns About Artificial Intelligence Regulation

Speakers raised concerns over the ordinance’s provisions on artificial intelligence (AI). Mezbah remarked, “The draft positions AI as equivalent to natural persons, a legally and ethically contentious concept. Advanced nations are yet to resolve AI accountability, and incorporating such provisions without proper analysis could lead to complications.”

Trisha Nashtaran, head of Agni Foundation and a gender rights advocate, criticized contradictions in the ordinance regarding internet access. “While it mentions universal internet access as a right, it also allows for arbitrary shutdowns without accountability. This punitive approach contradicts inclusivity principles,” she argued.

Youth and Digital Safety

Sadaat Rahman, founder of Cyber Teens Foundation, discussed risks faced by teenagers, including threats from deepfake technology, doxxing, and AI-based abuse. He called for explicit clauses to protect minors and clear post-abuse remedies.

Farzana Sithi of Safety Net shared her experience of being targeted by AI-manipulated videos during a political upheaval. She highlighted the lack of accessible legal recourse for women in smaller towns and advocated for a one-stop solution for cybercrime victims, along with awareness campaigns to address these challenges.

Recommendations and Way Forward

The dialogue concluded with a consensus on the need to pause the ordinance’s enactment until further consultations could include all stakeholders. Syeed Ahamed reiterated the call for clarity and inclusivity in the legislative process. He asserted, “This ordinance should safeguard all citizens, not become a tool for control or repression. Its drafting must reflect the voices of those it seeks to protect—women, children, and marginalized communities.”

Participants proposed creating a mediation forum comprising trained cyber police, experts, and representatives from diverse communities to oversee implementation and ensure transparency. They also stressed the need to promote digital literacy and adopt a rights-based approach to cyber governance, ensuring the ordinance aligns with the principles of fairness and inclusivity.

Related Posts