Pakistan’s Ministry of Interior told the Sindh High Court on Monday that its ban on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) was legitimate in light of national security concerns and that it did not violate Article 19 of the Pakistani Constitution.
The Ministry explained to the High Court that X’s presence in Pakistan without registering or agreeing to adhere to Pakistani law, and its noncompliance with the PTA’s requests, is disrespecting Pakistani sovereignty. It concluded that X’s actions warrant the necessity and constitutionality of banning X.
The ruling government of Pakistan imposed the ban on X on February 17 due to “national security concerns.” The ban was criticized as a curtailment of the freedom of speech and expression, especially during the country’s national elections in February. Civil and rights groups described the ban as an infringement of individuals’ rights of speech amid allegations of election fraud against the ruling government while the main opposition leader and the ex-prime minister of the country, Imran Khan, remains behind prison. The Sindh High Court issued a directive on February 21 to the PTA to restore access to X.
Article 19 of the Pakistani Constitution protects the freedom of speech and expression for Pakistanis subject to exceptions, including reasonable restrictions for the “integrity, security or defense of Pakistan or any part thereof[.]”
The Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF) expressed that the ban on X “sparked concerns over the infringement of citizens’ rights to free speech and information, particularly during significant political moments … The restriction impacts the essential flow of information, especially critical in the post-election phase amid political uncertainty, highlighting a disturbing trend towards limiting digital freedoms.”
Relatedly, on July 4, Pakistan’s Punjab government proposed a ban on all social media platforms for six days, citing security concerns during thousands of religious processions starting from July 13-18. The ministry recommended the proposal on grounds of potential violence and “security concerns.”