Editors’ Council Seeks Balance Between Cybersecurity and Press Freedom

The Editors’ Council has proposed 12 safeguards for the proposed Cyber Protection Act, calling for effective action against cybercrime alongside clear legal protections for independent journalism, public-interest disclosures and lawful expression. The organisation says the legislation must establish transparent procedures, judicial oversight and effective remedies to protect constitutional rights while addressing digital threats.

In a statement signed on Sunday by Editors’ Council President Nurul Kabir and General Secretary Dewan Hanif Mahmud, the organisation said its recommendations had been submitted to the office of Chief Information Officer Syed Abdal Ahmed for delivery to the Information and Broadcasting Minister.

The council said any provisions governing content removal or blocking, arrest, search, seizure, surveillance and access to digital information must be supported by a clear legal basis, transparent procedures, prompt judicial oversight and effective remedies.

It also called for independent judicial processes and appropriate legal safeguards, rather than executive powers, when law enforcement measures are taken against journalists over their professional work.

The 12 recommendations

1. Explicit protection for journalism and lawful expression

The proposed law should clearly protect news reports, investigative journalism, analysis and opinions published in the public interest as part of professional duties. Such content should not be treated as cybercrime solely because of its subject matter or critical stance.

Public-interest reporting, fair criticism, opinions, satire, cartoons, parody, consumer complaints, political criticism and inadvertent errors made in the course of professional journalism should not, by themselves, result in criminal liability. Offences related to expression should not be made non-bailable.

If the proposed law conflicts with any specific legislation designed to protect journalists’ and media organisations’ rights, provisions safeguarding press freedom and constitutional rights should take precedence.

2. Judicial approval before action against journalists

The council recommends requiring court approval before arrest, search, seizure, access to digital devices or data, or surveillance in cases directly related to a journalist’s professional activities.

In emergencies where an exception is necessary, subsequent judicial approval or review must be mandatory within 48 hours. Such cases should also be bailable, it said.

3. Separate definitions for misinformation, disinformation and rumours

Incorrect or incomplete information should not automatically be treated as a criminal offence. The law should separately define misinformation, disinformation and rumours. Information should not become evidence of a crime merely because it is unverified or unsupported.

The council also stressed the need for precise definitions of bullying, defamation, denigration, statements deemed insulting to the state, damage to friendly relations with foreign states, sexual harassment and sextortion.

4. Clear legal protection for public-interest journalism

The law should explicitly recognise the public interest in reporting, investigations and analysis concerning corruption, abuse of power, financial irregularities, environmental damage, public health, consumer rights, government expenditure and misconduct by public and private organisations.

5. Clear boundaries between government criticism and cybercrime

Criticism of the government, state institutions, public officials, elected representatives or government policies must not be treated as cybercrime. Political opinions, analysis, satire and sarcastic expression should likewise remain protected.

A statement should be considered criminal only when the elements of an offence specified by law have been established. The council recommends removing vague wording such as “bringing the state into disrepute.”

Terms such as “insulting the state,” “undermining friendly relations with foreign states” and “state security” must have precise definitions. Journalism, research, human rights-related observations, international cooperation and public-interest disclosures should not be brought under these provisions. Related offences should not be made non-bailable.

6. Transparency and judicial oversight for content removal

Orders to remove or block news reports, posts, videos or other digital content must identify the specific legal basis, provide written reasons and explain the necessity of the action.

Except in emergencies, affected individuals or organisations should have an opportunity to respond. Every order must be open to appeal within a specified period before an independent authority or court, with judicial review available.

If content is blocked on an emergency basis, subsequent court approval or review must take place within 48 hours. Information about content removal and blocking orders should also be made public.

7. Clear boundaries for defamation and insult

Rather than creating a new and more severe cybercrime category for online defamation, the council proposes referring such complaints to the Bangladesh Press Council under the existing framework.

8. No mobile courts or executive powers for journalism-related complaints

Complaints concerning news publication, expression, defamation or journalistic content should not be adjudicated through mobile courts or executive authorities.

Judicial oversight must be ensured when considering arrests, fines, content removal or other punitive measures arising from disputes over journalistic content.

9. No collective punishment of media organisations

A media organisation should not face the shutdown of its entire operation, cancellation of its registration or other disproportionate punishment because of an individual report or publication.

The council recommends placing these matters under the jurisdiction of the Bangladesh Press Council.

10. Protection of confidential journalistic sources

Describing source protection as a fundamental principle of journalism, the council says journalists must not be compelled to reveal the identities of their sources.

11. Effective Press Council procedures for professional disputes

Where the nature of a complaint permits, allegations involving journalism, publication, professional conduct, ethics or the performance of media responsibilities should first be handled through the Bangladesh Press Council’s existing complaint and inquiry procedures, rather than immediately triggering criminal proceedings.

The council’s jurisdiction and effectiveness should be modernised where necessary so that relevant digital news organisations, as well as newspapers, fall within its scope.

12. Independent oversight and accountability for the National Cyber Protection Council

The National Cyber Protection Council should exercise effective and independent oversight of agencies empowered to investigate, arrest, search, seize, conduct surveillance or remove content under cyber legislation.

The council’s composition, the independence of its members, the limits of its members’ and investigators’ powers, and accountability for decisions must be clearly established.

Its membership should include experts in cybersecurity, law and human rights, as well as people with experience in media and editorial leadership.

Decisions affecting the public interest, policy recommendations and the exercise of its powers should be transparent, with relevant information made publicly available.

Call to protect both digital security and media freedom

The Editors’ Council maintains that cybersecurity, cybercrime and journalism in the digital sphere are distinct areas. In its view, the proposed Cyber Protection (Amendment) Act does not clearly establish the necessary boundaries between them in many instances. The council warns that this ambiguity could obstruct independent and responsible journalism and undermine media freedom.

The statement urges the government to reconsider the legislation after clearly defining the distinct characteristics and scope of each area.

“A balanced and public-friendly cyber law can be established only through guarantees of transparency, judicial oversight, accountability and effective remedies,” the council said.

The organisation expressed hope that the law would be revised to reflect the views of all relevant stakeholders and establish an appropriate balance. Such a framework, it said, should strengthen cybersecurity and effectively address cybercrime while protecting independent journalism, public-interest disclosures and lawful expression.

The statement concluded that a secure digital Bangladesh and an independent media are not opposing objectives. Both can be strengthened together through sound legislation and appropriate safeguards.

//DBTech/DSTPR/SMP/MIST//