Call for Collaborative Cybersecurity Charter

DSA Victims Network Highlights 8 Flaws in Cyber Protection Ordinance

The DSA Victims Network has called for drafting the Cyber Protection Ordinance based on inclusivity and transparency, urging the participation of all stakeholders. On Sunday, 27 victimized members of the network, who had previously faced attacks and lawsuits for expressing their views online, issued a statement in this regard.

In the statement, the victims of repression under the Cyber Protection Ordinance, the now-repealed Section 57 of the ICT Act, and the abolished Digital Security Act (DSA) expressed their strong condemnation and frustration over the drafting of the Cyber Protection Ordinance, which has received policy approval from the Advisory Council without ensuring citizen participation and transparency.

The statement reads: “Through the July uprising, the revolutionary students and people of Bangladesh ousted the autocratic Sheikh Hasina and her fascist Awami League government from power. Over two thousand martyrs and more than twenty thousand injured revolutionary citizens fell victim to crimes against humanity by the murderous Hasina regime, bringing a new sense of freedom for Bangladesh. The current interim government, sworn in with a promise to uphold the freedom, liberation, and human dignity of the people, rose to power through the sacrifices of the public. Therefore, the expectation is that the interim government will draft citizen-friendly laws and policies through inclusive discussions with all stakeholders.”

Highlighting their concerns, the statement identifies eight key issues with the draft Cyber Protection Ordinance:

The draft was approved in principle by the Advisory Council without adequate participation and consultation with stakeholders, which undermines the “Rule of Law.” Such a secretive approach to law-making reflects a continuation of the fascist tendencies of the previous Awami League government under Sheikh Hasina.
A Special Advisor assisting the Honorable Advisor to the Ministry of Information and Technology shared selective and controversial provisions of the ordinance on social media through their personal profile instead of publishing the full draft for public scrutiny. This unprofessional behavior has sparked discontent among stakeholders and demands accountability.
Apart from repealing a few controversial provisions and reducing penalties, the approved draft of the ordinance does not significantly differ from the abolished Digital Security Act. For instance, Subsections 1 and 2 of Section 8 grant the Director General of the National Cybersecurity Agency the power to remove or block any information deemed a threat to national solidarity, security, defense, religious values, or public order. Such authority paves the way for discriminatory decision-making and abuse of power to suppress dissent.
The National Cybersecurity Council is dominated by government ministers, bureaucrats, and law enforcement officials, perpetuating the repressive elements of the Digital Security Act and the Cybersecurity Act. The provisions for warrantless arrests and the continuation of unresolved cases under DSA/CSA also reflect this continuity.
Without inclusive stakeholder consultation, the draft fails to define several important terms, such as types of cybercrimes, online sexual abuse, cyberbullying, online grooming, and personal data. It also lacks provisions for key issues such as service provider liability, clear standards for expert recognition, and a cybersecurity framework.
The draft confuses three distinct areas—cybersecurity, cybercrime, and content moderation—resulting in a misleading document presented to the advisors and the public.
The absence of detailed provisions on emerging areas such as national artificial intelligence (AI) laws/policies, personal data protection laws, blockchain laws, and over-the-top (OTT) policies raises concerns about potential conflicts with these future frameworks.
The draft does not align with recent global developments and policy advancements. It fails to incorporate the principles outlined in the Global Digital Compact (GDC), announced at the UN Summit of the Future on September 22, or the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 24. This omission could significantly hinder creativity among entrepreneurs and innovators.

The statement was signed by several prominent individuals, including:

Ishrat Jahan Reily, a worker with the Bandini Rehabilitation Initiative, Dhaka.
Rahim Shubho, a journalist from Thakurgaon.
Saidul Haque, a student from Feni.
Manjila Jhuma, a Supreme Court lawyer, Dhaka.
Jamal Mir, a journalist from Barguna.
Nusrat Jahan Sonia, a teacher from Patuakhali.
Fazle Elahi, a journalist from Rangamati.
Rudra Iqbal, a journalist from Dhaka.
Adhara Yasmin, Mumitul Mimma, and Bayezid Ahmed.
Khadijatul Kubra, a student from Jagannath University.
Abu Taiyab, a journalist from Khulna.
Mohammad Imon, a student from Mymensingh’s Bhaluka.
Mohammad Mahtab Uddin Talukder, a journalist from Sunamganj.
Sirajam Munira, a teacher from Begum Rokeya University.
Dr. Maidul Islam, a sociology PhD researcher at the University of Pittsburgh, USA.
Afroza Sarker, a teacher from Rangpur.
Dilip Roy, President of Biplobi Chhatra Maitree.
AKM Wahiduzzaman, a Malaysia-based political analyst.
Maruf Hossain, former General Secretary of Bangladesh Chhatra Federation, Chattogram Metropolitan.
Engineer Shahnewaz Chowdhury, a human rights activist from Chattogram.
Golam Mahfuz Jowardar, Convener of the DSA Victims Network.
Pritam Das, Member Secretary of the DSA Victims Network.
Didarul Bhuiyan, Coordinator of the Rashtriya Songskar Andolon.