Showing posts from October, 2025

Justice Has No Flag: Why War Crimes Are War Crimes — No Matter Who Commits Them

Who Rules the World When No One Is Wise? The Ethical Vacuum Behind the U.S.–China Rivalry

Faith, Finance, and Silence: How the West Lost Its Moral Voice on Israel

Why Fewer International Students Are Choosing America — and Turning to Germany Instead

Key Donor Countries Supporting Ukraine (as of 2025)

Sinwar, Trauma, and the Lessons the Middle East Refuses to Learn

We Were Freed, Not Healed

Stop Trying to Be an AI Expert. Be Its Translator.

No, Elon Musk Is Not the Dajjāl

Germany’s Invisible Riders: How Delivery Apps Exploit the Immigrant Workforce Behind the Wheels

Was the European Parliament Infiltrated by Russian Agents?

Ukraine’s Courage Is Endless. Its Ammunition Isn’t.

Why Success Abroad Isn’t “Slave Pride”: The Truth About Indian Talent and H-1B Migration

Europe Wants Its Gold Back — and Its Trust, Too

Pakistan’s 2025 Digital Law: Compatibility with Qur’an and Sunnah? Pakistan’s Constitution and Islamic Law: The Constitution of Pakistan (1973) embeds Islamic principles in its very foundation. The Objectives Resolution – made part of the Constitution’s preamble – declares that sovereignty belongs to Allah and that Muslims shall be enabled to live according to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah. More concretely, Article 227 of the Constitution stipulates that all laws must conform to the injunctions of Islam and that *“no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such injunctions”*. In practice, this means lawmakers are constitutionally bound to ensure new legislation does not contradict the Qur’an or the Sunnah (the teachings and practices of Prophet Muhammad). A Council of Islamic Ideology exists to advise on whether proposed laws align with Islamic injunctions, and a Federal Shariat Court can strike down laws found *“repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam”*. Any new law – including digital media laws – must pass this Islamic compatibility test in theory. The 2025 Digital Law (PECA Amendment): In January 2025, Pakistan’s parliament passed and President Asif Ali Zardari signed the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act, 2025 (PECA 2025) into law. This law amends the 2016 cybercrimes act, introducing sweeping new provisions to regulate online content. Notably, it criminalizes the dissemination of “fake or false” information online, with hefty penalties – up to three years imprisonment and Rs 2 million in fines for anyone who “intentionally spreads, displays, or transmits false information” that could cause “fear, panic, or unrest” in society. The amendment’s wording is broad and vaguely framed, as it does not precisely define what constitutes “fake” news. It also establishes new bodies, including a Social Media/Digital Protection Authority, empowered to remove or block online content deemed false, hateful, or *“against the ideology of Pakistan”*. The authority can require social media companies to register locally and comply with content removal orders. A special Social Media Protection Tribunal is set up to hear offenses, though critics note it is composed of government-appointed officials rather than independent judges. In essence, the 2025 PECA amendments significantly expand the government’s control over digital expression, ostensibly to curb misinformation and maintain public order. Journalists protest in Islamabad on January 28, 2025 against the PECA Amendment, calling it a “black law” that curbs freedom of speech. Many media organizations warned the law would be used to stifle dissent under the pretext of fighting “fake news.” Alignment with Qur’an and Sunnah – Supporting Arguments: On the face of it, the aims of the new digital law can be seen as consistent with certain Islamic principles. Islam strongly condemns lying, false testimony, and spreading unverified rumors that can harm others. The Qur’an explicitly instructs believers: *“O you who have believed, if a disobedient one comes to you with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become regretful for what you have done”*. This verse (Qur’an 49:6) establishes the obligation to verify news and not spread misinformation. Likewise, a saying of the Prophet Muhammad warns that it is “enough falsehood for a person to repeat everything they hear”, cautioning against circulating unvetted information. From this perspective, a law that punishes the intentional spreading of falsehood and seeks to prevent public panic or disorder could be seen as upholding the Islamic ethic of truthfulness. Preventing societal turmoil caused by lies and rumors aligns with the Islamic injunction to “avoid and remove harm” from society. Moreover, Islam considers the protection of people’s honor and public order important; for example, slander and false accusations (especially false witness or accusing someone of a crime without proof) are regarded as grave sins in the Qur’an. Given these principles, one could argue that penalizing malicious disinformation – which can ruin reputations or incite harmful unrest – is not inherently un-Islamic. In fact, it serves a purpose (combatting deceit and fitna (chaos)) that Islamic law would conceptually support. The government has also framed the law as a way to uphold the “ideology of Pakistan”, which includes Islamic values, by blocking content that is anti-state or sacrilegious. Ensuring information integrity and social stability can thus be viewed as consistent with the maqāṣid al-sharī‘a (objectives of Islamic law), such as protection of honor, intellect, and public peace. Concerns over Compatibility – Dissenting View: Despite the above alignment, serious questions have been raised about the law’s compatibility with Islamic injunctions on justice and truth. Critics note that the vague definition of “false information” and the broad powers given to authorities could be misused to silence truthful criticism and dissent. Islamic teachings place great emphasis on justice, honest testimony, and speaking truth to those in power – even when it is difficult. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said, *“Speak the truth even if it is bitter.”* In Islam, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong is a duty; this includes holding rulers and institutions accountable and conveying truth in the public interest. The Qur’an commands believers to stand firm for justice and truth, *“even though it be against yourselves or your kin”*, and not to mix truth with falsehood or conceal what is true. If the new law is applied in a way that suppresses truthful speech or whistle-blowing under the guise of combating “fake news,” it would conflict with these Islamic principles. For instance, labeling genuine criticism of government or exposure of corruption as “false information” (simply because it embarrasses authorities) would amount to concealing the truth and perpetuating injustice – clearly against the Qur’anic ethos. There is a well-known saying in Islamic tradition that “the best form of jihad is to speak a word of truth in front of an oppressive ruler.” If the PECA 2025 law were used to punish people for speaking out against wrongdoing in government or society, it would impede the Islamic duty of amr bil maʿruf (promoting right) and nahy ʿanil munkar (preventing wrong). Additionally, Islam requires due process and fairness in implementing punishments; laws must not be unjust or overly discretionary. The concern with PECA 2025 is that its overbroad criteria (e.g. content causing “unrest” or offending “ideology”) grant officials wide latitude to decide what speech is illegal. Such unchecked powers can lead to ẓulm (injustice), which Islam unequivocally forbids. Any punishment under Islamic law demands clear evidence and specific definitions of offenses – the Prophet himself warned against ambiguous Hudood punishments by saying to “avoid legal punishment in cases of doubt”. If the cybercrime law’s ambiguity leads to arbitrary or unjust repression, that aspect would be incompatible with Islamic concepts of justice. Constitutional Oversight and Current Status: It is important to note that, so far, no court or Islamic advisory body in Pakistan has officially struck down the PECA 2025 amendment on Islamic grounds. The law was primarily challenged by journalists and civil society on the basis of fundamental rights (freedom of expression) rather than an explicit Qur’an/Sunnah violation. The Council of Islamic Ideology was reportedly not consulted before passage. However, given the constitutional mandate, the law could be reviewed if a petition claimed it contravenes Islamic injunctions. Under Article 227 and related provisions, if any citizen or group believes a law is “repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam”, they may seek advice from the Council of Islamic Ideology or a ruling from the Shariat Court. For instance, a law that gagged legitimate truth-telling could be argued to violate Qur’anic commands of honesty and justice. Whether PECA 2025 crosses that line is debatable and would hinge on how it is enforced. Its text does not overtly mandate anything like forbidding prayer, usury, or other clear-cut haram acts; rather, the contention is about potential abuse of a generally permissible aim (curbing lies) to achieve impermissible ends (muzzling truth and dissent). The Pakistani government defended the amendment as targeting only “fake and false news” and not silencing true journalism. In theory, punishing falsehood and protecting the public from chaos is Sharia-compliant, but persecuting the innocent or truthful would violate Sharia. This fine line will likely determine the Islamic legitimacy of the law. Conclusion: Under Pakistan’s constitutional framework, no law can violate the Qur’an and Sunnah, and the new digital law must be measured against this standard. In principle, the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act 2025 does not obviously contradict any specific injunction of Islam – its stated intent to curb misinformation, slander, and societal discord can be seen as upholding Islamic values of truthfulness and public order. However, the implementation of this law is crucial. If applied narrowly and fairly to punish malicious liars who spread harmful falsehoods, it would likely be compatible with the Qur’an and Sunnah – since Islam has no tolerance for those who spread lies and harm the community. On the other hand, if the law’s ambiguous provisions are used to infringe on justice, suppress valid criticism, or conceal the truth, then it would contradict fundamental Islamic teachings that encourage honest counsel, accountability, and justice in governance. In short, there is nothing inherently un-Islamic about outlawing fake news, but injustice and oppression carried out in the name of this law would certainly be un-Islamic. As with any law in Pakistan, PECA 2025 remains subject to review under the Constitution’s Islamic clauses. Moving forward, it may require refinement (e.g. clearer definitions and safeguards against misuse) to fully satisfy both the constitutional requirement and the higher principles of Sharia. The balance between curbing falsehood and upholding truth/justice must be carefully maintained to ensure the law truly adheres to the spirit of the Qur’an and Sunnah, as mandated by Pakistan’s founders. Sources: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Article 227 (Islamic Provisions) Dawn (Pakistani newspaper) – report on PECA Amendment 2025 passage and content Human Rights Watch – “Pakistan: Repeal Amendment to Draconian Cyber Law” (Feb 2025) Amnesty International – press release on PECA Amendment (Jan 2025) The Express Tribune – news report on President Zardari signing PECA 2025 and its provisions Reuters News – “Pakistani journalists rally against law regulating social media” (Jan 28, 2025) Yaqeen Institute – “Misinformation and Islamic Ethics” (2024) – discusses Islam’s stance on lying and verifying news Islamicity.org – “Speaking Truth to Power” – quotes Qur’an and Hadith on truth and justice.

Load More Posts That is All