Blog Archives

All Posts in Press Releases

May 4, 2018 - Comments Off on Statement: DRF expresses concerns over the ban on the messaging app Telegram in Pakistan

Statement: DRF expresses concerns over the ban on the messaging app Telegram in Pakistan

telegram

We at the Digital Rights Foundation (DRF) are extremely concerned regarding the ban on the social media messaging application, Telegram, by the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA). We are issuing a statement to express our concerns about this ban which curtails the right to communicate in a secure and safe manner.

As per Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited’s (PTCL) official twitter account, it was confirmed on the 9th of November last year that Telegram had been banned as per PTA’s instructions. This notification was restricted to PTCL’s own network. However multiple attempts by other users as well as our team have led to the confirmation of the fact that the ban is effective across networks.

The need to implement policy that would bar access to a messaging platform similar to WhatsApp is befuddling and seemingly arbitrary.

We believe that such a decision hinders citizen's freedom of expression, which is a base and fundamental right as per Article 19 of our Constitution. It is a fundamental right recognized in countries the world over and was also recognized by ours through ratification of international treaties.

The cloud-based instant messaging service is a close second to WhatsApp in terms of popularity, however it has endearing features of its own, including its secret chat option and ability to send up to 1.5 GB worth of files, that prompts its usage. The security features of the app are its biggest selling point and in today’s world of information leaks and data hacks, it provides something we all desire, no matter what our station in life: some semblance of privacy. Such an avenue for communication without intrusion should definitely remain available to all those who choose to use it.  In any case, whether there is an alternate available or not, this blocking off of access is unconscionable, especially in light of the fact that no official notification was made public and neither was any reason provided.

Curtailing access to information is a violation of the civilians’ rights and basic expectations of a democracy. DRF demands the government authorities to provide justification on why was the app blocked and work towards ensuring transparency in such process.

April 24, 2018 - Comments Off on Statement: DRF expresses concerns over the security breach of Careem’s servers

Statement: DRF expresses concerns over the security breach of Careem’s servers

Digital Rights Foundation expresses serious concerns over the breach of servers of one of the most used ride-hailing services in Pakistan, Careem. It was announced in the company’s official statement on April 23 that its servers were breached on January 14, 2018 and since then it has been investigating the matter. According to the statement, the private and sensitive information of its millions of customers and drivers were stolen, which included their names, contact numbers, email addresses, passwords and trip data. According to the company, however, credit card and financial details were not affected.

This breach is particularly worrisome because Careem, as a ride-sharing application, amassed a huge amount critical and personally identifiable information of its users. Information compromised in the breach, i.e. names, phone numbers and trip data, can help identify individuals but also their whereabouts given trip patterns. This data, once revealed, has the potential to put lives in danger.

While we commend their effort of being transparent, the incident points at the larger issue of weak data protection protocols and putting people’s sensitive information and, in grim situations, their lives at risk. Moreover, in the light of many physical attacks on the drivers of the ride-sharing apps in the past couple of months in Pakistan, this incident further endangers life and property of the people using these services for an honest living or for safe commuting.

This particular breach of Careem’s security protocols raises a lot of queries and concerns that their statement failed to answer. First and foremost, why did it take four months to report the incident to the public. Although the blog states that they took their time to investigate into the details of the breach due to the complex nature of the incident, but the fact remains - millions of Careem’s customers and drivers were using their compromised accounts while there data was compromised. Customers were kept in the dark and had no mechanism of holding the company accountable.

Secondly, the statement fails to mention the number of customers that were affected by this breach. Careem is used by over 14 million users around the world, and the silence of this important aspect could signify that all of the users were influenced.

Furthermore, it is the right of the customers to have full transparency of the incident and the statement leaves several questions unanswered. Important questions like who was behind the hack, what happened to the stolen data, where is it stored, what measures has Careem taken to ensure the security of the stolen data, whether Careem takes responsibility of any unforeseen incident that the misuse of this data may ensue, and what actions has it taken to warrant strong security of customer information in the future.

Careem’s silence for four months and inadequate justification of the data breach is indicative of the fact that tech companies operate without being held accountable under any laws in the countries where they operate. Furthermore, in the absence of a data protection legislation that DRF has been advocating for since last year, incidents like this put Pakistani customers at risk and at the mercy of hackers who can use this stolen information against them without any legal repercussions.

It would be remiss not to point out that the business model for several tech companies has been to amass personal data and monetize it for profit-making. Companies, such as Careem, need to be more transparent regarding what data is collected, its storage and its ultimate use; and at the same time reorient its approach towards data. A larger critique of these practices and their human rights implications is in order.

April 11, 2018 - Comments Off on Statement: DRF condemns Google’s alliance with Pentagon

Statement: DRF condemns Google’s alliance with Pentagon

google-data-trends-analytics-ss-1920

Digital Rights Foundation (DRF) strictly condemns the involvement of technology giant Google with the US Department of Defense’s (DoD) Project Maven, an initiative that intends to deploy machine learning for military purposes, particularly in terms of using artificial intelligence to interpret video imagery which will potentially be used to improve the targeting of drone strikes.

This recent development, in the highest echelons of technology, has been unsettling for us as a digital rights organization situated in a region that has been at the epicenter of military operations by the United States, particularly drone strikes. DRF would like to register its concerns and alarm regarding the far-reaching ramifications of the proposal.

Here is what we know so far:

  1. Employees of Google, numbering in thousands (3000+) have drafted and signed a letter in protest of their employer’s collaboration with the State Department in Project Maven to help increase the existing technology’s efficacy in terms of video imagery and drone strike targeting. “We believe that Google should not be involved in the business of war”, the employees’ letter stated.
  2. The outcry is motivated by the employees’ resistance to the idea of Google allocating resources to the DoD for military surveillance and the potential ethical implication of such involvement. The news, broken by Gizmodo’s article on the 3rd of March, 2018 notes that this pilot project which was not previously reported, was the subject of much debate after being shared on an internal mailing list.
  3. The letter, addressed to the CEO, Sundar Pichai, demands a reassurance from the company by asking it to extricate itself from this allegiance with the Pentagon - the Headquarters of DoD - and for the implementation of a policy which promises that it will not “ever build warfare technology”.

This state of affairs is alarming for a multitude of reasons, the most crucial of which is the possible trend that this could give rise to in terms of overlapping roles being played by organisations that deal in mass data collection to operate and streamline their products in collaboration with state apparatus. The prime concern here is that a behemoth such as Google is used and trusted by billions every single day for business and leisure. Given its influence and role in the daily lives of people all around the world, and the fact that the fate of the data we all hand over to it is hitherto unknown, there will be serious doubts about how it is used. In the aftermath of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, this is a worrisome development especially since no official word has come from Google denouncing data leaks and providing reassurance as to the privacy of users.

Secondly, it should be noted that such projects carry the potential to cause physical harm to humans and/or give rise to geopolitical instability, so Google and the individuals working at the company should be extremely cautious about working with any military agency, especially given the notorious history of conquest that the US armed force enjoys. The consequences of such projects are not only difficult to mitigate but even predict. Moreover, they cannot assume that the DoD has fully assessed the risks involved in the Project before going ahead with it further. It is important to highlight that in the past, drone strikes have been inaccurate and have resulted in the loss of innocent lives, therefore creating a sense of fear within the general population of the targeted area. Indeed the sharpening of the military’s ‘lethality’ has been termed as a goal by the US defense secretary, Jim Mattis, a worrying indicator of the mindset in place. Thus, the onus is on Google as well to fully analyze the consequences and if this new technology is used by the US armed forces, then Google bears the ethical responsibility for the casualties.

Thirdly, since many of the details of Project Maven have not been made public, it is uncertain if Google has asked an independently constituted ethics board to veto or raise concerns regarding any aspects of the program. Any project review process should not only be independent and transparent but should also be made public, and without independent oversight, such a project runs a real risk of harm.

Lastly, as a country on the receiving end of drone surveillance and attacks, this does not bode well for Pakistan. These strikes have targeted the most vulnerable areas of Pakistan, particularly the politically marginalized FATA. As per a report published by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a UK-based not-for-profit organization, the strikes have killed between 424 to 966 civilians between 2004 and 2016. For a country not actively at war and for its citizens who did not have the ability or even get the chance to defend themselves before being killed by orders issued from thousand of miles away, this is a cruel mockery of the sovereignty of our boundaries. The alliance of Google with what is essentially a perpetration of ‘war crimes’ within the bounds of our nation, comes across as a breach of DRF’s beliefs in democratic participation. Drone strikes have in the past, however, repeatedly undermined democratic processes and denied decision-making powers to Pakistani citizens. The very concept of foreign surveillance within the territory of Pakistan and its airspace is unsettling.

The US government officials claim that the drone strikes are accurate and rarely harm innocent lives in the area but the reported number of civilian lives lost due to these attacks suggests otherwise. It has also been reported that in Pakistan where drone strikes take place, parents have taken their children out of school to protect them from possible strikes. Such are the lives of civilians living in these affected areas where they cannot even enjoy something as basic as roaming around in the streets without fearing for their lives.

Despite the high number of civilian casualties and criticism that the program lacks transparency, the US Government has repeatedly defended the strikes. While they claim that drone strikes are accurate and rarely harm civilians, strikes can kill or injure anyone in the area, even if they are only meant to kill a targeted individual. Many victims have come forward and shared their harrowing stories of when a drone strike changed their lives. One of the victims of a drone attack reported that 11 of his family members were killed, despite having no links with the Taliban. A member of a local pro-government peace committee was also killed, along with his three sons and a nephew, due to wrongly targeting their house, instead of where the militants resided. These are just two out of the many examples where civilians were killed in the name of collateral damage. Unfortunately, there is no accountability, at least in Pakistan, the death tolls are never confirmed and the strikes, whether successful or not, are never publicly acknowledged by the US government. The psychological impact of drone surveillance, when combined with the civilian casualties during strikes, leads to significant negative strategic costs that need to be incorporated into the assessment of the project by not only the US government but all the relevant stakeholders involved in aiding this project, including Google.

Although it is commendable that Google employees are debating the project internally and voicing their dissent, however there are other stakeholders involved as well--the citizens of countries who are on the receiving end of US surveillance and drone strikes. We strongly urge Google to reconsider the decision to collaborate with the DoD, considering the cost, hefty ethical stakes and safety risks involved.

February 26, 2018 - Comments Off on Demands of the Civil Society: We strongly condemn behaviour of law enforcement authorities in blasphemy case

Demands of the Civil Society: We strongly condemn behaviour of law enforcement authorities in blasphemy case

Civil society strongly condemns behaviour of law enforcement authorities in blasphemy case

  1. We as civil society organisations and concerned citizens condemn in the strongest possible terms the torture and inhumane treatment of Patras Masih and Sajid Masih by the FIA in Lahore. Not only is this a complete violation of the rights of the accused enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan, but seriously undermines the credibility of law enforcement agencies to protect citizens.
  2. Blasphemy allegations emerged against the accused, Patras Masih, 17 years old, in Shahdara last week. Announcements were made through mosque loudspeakers identifying the accused, alleging that he shared “blasphemous content” on social media supposedly on January 16, 2018. The Tehreek Labaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLYR) and other religious parties blocked the Shahdara intersection, incited violence against the family and demanded the arrest of Patras Masih. These threats have endangered the entire Christian community living in Dhir village in Shahdara Town, resulting in some fleeing their homes. An FIR was registered against Patras (FIR No. 174/18) on February 19 at the Shahdara Town Police Station under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code that carries a mandatory death sentence.
  3. The accused and his cousin, Sajid Masih, 24, were in the custody of the FIA at the Punjab Headquarters on February 23, 2018 when the incident in question occurred. In a sensitive and charged case of blasphemy, it was highly irregular and imprudent that, according to Pakistan Today, in addition to the complainants, members of the TLYR and other religious parties were also present at the FIA building at the time of the investigation.
  4. It has come to light that around 6:00 PM, Sajid fell off the fourth floor of the FIA building resulting in serious injuries to his head and body. The FIA initially denied that such an incident had taken place. However, it has come to light that Sajid and Patras were tortured by officers of the cyber crime wing and were coerced into sexually assaulting one another. Sajid, pleaded with them to stop. As a last resort, in order to escape the torture and sexual abuse, he jumped off the fourth floor of the FIA building, where the cyber crime wing is located. Sajid is currently in the hospital recovering from his injuries.
  5. We are seriously concerned regarding the treatment of marginalised groups by law enforcement agencies, specifically religious minorities. The state has a heightened duty to protect persecuted groups. Given the history of the blasphemy law being misused to target minority groups, it is egregious that the FIA completely failed to provide any security to the accused and the family. The law enforcement authorities have not only failed in their duty to protect minorities, but have actively participated in violence against them. The vulnerabilities of the accused were exploited by the law enforcement agency to sexually abuse and torture them. This is in direct violation of Article 14 of the Constitution and Pakistan’s international commitments under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
  6. As concerned members of civil society and organisations working on digital/human rights, we urge the government to hold the concerned law enforcement officers accountable and take active measures to ensure that Patras Masih and Sajid Masih are given the necessary security given the nature of the accusations made against them.

Demands of the Civil Society:

We demand the Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Human Rights, Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, Senate Committee on Human Rights to,

  1. Immediately WITHDRAW the FIR against Sajid Masih for attempted suicide given the fact that he was attempting to escape from the physical and psychological torture and sexual abuse being inflicted on him by state agencies. Section 325 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) is a regressive and colonial-era law that criminalises suicide, and will soon be repealed by the Criminal Laws Amendment Bill 2017.
  2. Pursuant to the right to a fair trial enshrined under Article 10A of the Constitution, the accused must not be denied any of their civil liberties and rights. Patras and Sajid’s lawyer should be granted immediate ACCESS to the accused. Attempts to withhold their right to counsel will result in a violation of fundamental rights.
  3. Security should be PROVIDED to the accused and their family in order to prevent the real and present threat of violence. Attacks against the accused and their family are common in cases of blasphemy and specifically in this case public threats have been issued, making the possibility of violence reasonably foreseeable. The accused has already been attacked outside court where he appeared for his remand hearing on February 23, 2018. Failure of the state to provide protection will constitute willful negligence on their part.
  4. A full and independent INQUIRY of this incident should be conducted to hold the concerned law enforcement authority and officials accountable. The inquiry should be comprehensive, independent and transparent. The inquiry committee should specifically investigate the FIA officials involved for abuse of power, sexual assault and torture. Any withholding of information should be dealt with seriously.
  5. Keeping Article 14 of the Constitution and Pakistan’s international commitments under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) in consideration, law enforcement agencies should be SEVERELY PENALISED for effectuating torture against the accused. Drastic measures should be in place to ensure that such incidents are not allowed to take place again.
  6. ESTABLISH checks and balances on the abuse of power by law enforcement authorities, particularly for policing powers granted under the National Action Plan, the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act and terrorism-related legislation. The government is urged to REVIEW these powers and that the right balance is struck to ensure that there are protections in place for the accused.
  7. An independent Civil Society Steering Committee needs to be SET UP to review and check the performance of the National Response Center for Cyber Crime (NR3C), FIA. This committee should include members of civil society, technical experts and parliamentarians. The recommendations and concerns raised by the Committee should be taken into account when reviewing the progress of the FIA under section 53 of PECA and determinations of funding by the Ministry of Interior.
  8. Plans to incorporate provisions relating to blasphemy into the PECA need to be seriously RECONSIDERED given inability of the FIA to provide protection to the accused in such cases. Adding these provisions will effectively allow for the weaponization of blasphemy accusations without offsetting protections for the accused.
  9. Special PROTOCOLS to be issued for law enforcement when processing cases of blasphemy, ensuring the rights and security of the accused. Only specially trained law enforcement officers should be allowed to investigate these cases, with oversight with the Steering Committee.
  10. EFFORTS should be made to ensure that Investigating Officers and officials from minority groups are represented in law enforcement agencies. Quotas for women and minority groups need to be implemented with immediate effect and consistently across offices of the FIA.

Endorsed by:

  1. Alpha Human Rights Care Association
  2. Blackstone School of Law
  3. Bolo Bhi
  4. Cecil & Iris Chaudhry Foundation (CICF)
  5. Centre for Legal Aid Assistance and Settlement (CLAAS)
  6. Courting The Law
  7. Democratic Commission for Human Development (DCHD)
  8. Democratic Students’ Alliance (DSA)
  9. Digital Rights Foundation (DRF)
  10. Dove Foundation Pakistan
  11. Ending Violence against Women and Girls Alliance (EVAWG Alliance)
  12. Freedom Network
  13. Girls at Dhabas
  14. Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP)
  15. Institute for Peace and Secular Studies
  16. Khwendo Kor
  17. IRADA (Institute for Research, Advocacy and Development)
  18. LAAS
  19. Media Matters for Democracy (MMFD)
  20. Minorities Rights Watch
  21. National Commission for Justice and Peace (NCJP)
  22. Network of Journalist for Digital Rights
  23. New Emerging Development Organization (NEDO)
  24. NET
  25. Pakhtunkhwa Ullasi Tehrik
  26. Pakistan Feminist Watch
  27. Pattan
  28. Rawadari Tehreek
  29. SATH Pakistan
  30. Shirkatgah
  31. South Asian Partnership Pakistan (SAP-PK)
  32. Takkra Qabailee Khwendy
  33. Tangh Development Society
  34. The ASR Resource Centre
  35. The Feminist Collective
  36. The Institute of Women’s Studies, Lahore
  37. The Voice Society
  38. Women United for Digital Rights
  39. Women’s Action Forum, Hyderabad
  40. Women’s Action Forum, Islamabad
  41. Women’s Action Forum, Karachi
  42. Women’s Action Forum, Lahore
  43. Women’s Action Forum, Peshawar
  44. A. H. Nayyar
  45. Adnan Ahmad Chaudhri
  46. Aila Fill, NCJP
  47. Akram Pervez
  48. Aleena Rashid
  49. Ali Kamran
  50. Amber Rahim Shamsi, Journalist
  51. Amna Mir
  52. Anam Lodhi, Journalist
  53. Anbreen Ajaib
  54. Angbeen Atif Mirza, Advocate High Court
  55. Arifa Mazhar
  56. Asad Jamal, Advocate High Court
  57. Asha Bedar
  58. Asher Bhatti
  59. Atiqa Shahid
  60. Ayra Inderyas
  61. Ayesha Khan
  62. Barrister Hassan Niazi, Law Clinic
  63. Bari Sarwar
  64. Bilal Hasan Minto, Advocate Supreme Court
  65. Bushra Gohar
  66. Daniyal Yousaf
  67. Dara Shikoh
  68. Diep Saeeda
  69. Dr. Parveen Ashraf
  70. Dr Riaz Assi
  71. Faheem Zafar
  72. Farida Shaheed
  73. Ferida Sher
  74. Farooq Bashir
  75. Fatima A. Athar
  76. Fatima Anwar, Lawyer
  77. Furhan Hussain
  78. Ghazala Afghan
  79. Haider Zafar
  80. Hamza Irshad
  81. Hiba Akbar, Advocate High Court
  82. Hija Kamran
  83. Hina Vahidy, Peace and Development Organisation
  84. Hira Saleem, Advocate High Court
  85. Hyra Basit
  86. Humaira Sheikh
  87. Iqbal Khattak, Freedom Network
  88. Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir
  89. Imran Nafees Siddiqui
  90. James Rehmat, Ecumenical Commission for Human Development
  91. Jannat Ali Kalyar, Barrister
  92. Jannat Fazal
  93. Jalila Haider
  94. Javed Akhtar, Support With Working Solution (SWWS)
  95. Jibran Nasir
  96. Joseph Francis
  97. Kashif Nemat, Advocate High Court
  98. Khadija S. Ubeid, Attorney at Law
  99. Khawar Mumtaz
  100. Kiran Nazish, Journalist
  101. Lala Hassan
  102. Lala Rukh Khan
  103. Luavut Zahid
  104. Lynette Viccaji
  105. Maham Ali
  106. Maliha Zia Lari, Lawyer
  107. Malik Faraz
  108. Maria Chaudhry
  109. Maria Rashid
  110. Marium Khalid, Advocate High Court
  111. Meera Ghani
  112. Mohammad Tehseen
  113. Muhammad Salman Khan, Queeristan
  114. Musirah Farrukh
  115. Nadeem Anthony
  116. Nadia Jamil
  117. Naeem Sadiq
  118. Naeema Malik
  119. Naheed Aziz
  120. Nasir David
  121. Nasir Saeed
  122. Nasreen Kazmi
  123. Naveed Fabian
  124. Nazia Rafique Paul
  125. Nazish Attaullah
  126. Nyla Ahsan
  127. Nighat Dad, digital rights activist/Advocate High Court
  128. Nighat Said Khan
  129. Nijah S. Khan
  130. Noor Ejaz Chaudhry, Lawyer
  131. Noreen Lehri
  132. Nosheen Abbas Kazmi, Journalist
  133. Omer Imran Malik, Associate; Mandviwalla and Zafar; CEO of Tahafuz Project
  134. Pastor Shahid M.Paul Christ Assemblies Church International
  135. Parveen Ashraf Hunzai
  136. Prof. Farkhanda Aurangzeb
  137. Ramis Sohail, Lawyer
  138. Riaz Anjum, Advocate High Court
  139. Roland deSouza
  140. Rubina Saigal
  141. Rukhsana Rashid
  142. Rukhshanda Naz
  143. Rukhshanda Naz, Advocate
  144. Rumana Husain
  145. Saadia Toor
  146. Sabrina Dawood
  147. Saddique John
  148. Sadia Bukhari
  149. Safdar Chaudhry
  150. Safina Javed
  151. Sajida Billy
  152. Sajjad Anwar
  153. Sana Mehmud
  154. Sana Saleem
  155. Sarah Zaman
  156. Sarwar Bari
  157. Seerat Khan
  158. Sehar Tariq
  159. Sehar Naveed
  160. Shaukat Ali
  161. Sheema Kermani, Tehreek e Niswan
  162. Shireen Aslam
  163. Shmyla Khan, Lawyer
  164. Sourayya Frick Azam
  165. Sumera Haq
  166. Sumaira Ashfaq
  167. Syed Ali Mehdi Zaidi, Teacher
  168. Syed Nadeem Ahmad
  169. Tahira Abdullah
  170. Tanzila Mazhar, Journalist
  171. Ujala Akram,
  172. Victoria deSouza
  173. Watson Gill
  174. Yousaf Benjamin
  175. Yousaf Mubark
  176. Zahra Khan, Thrive Pakistan
  177. Zehra Zaidi, Lawyer
  178. Ziauddin Yousafzai, UN Special Advisor on Global Education
  179. Zohra Yousaf
  180. Zoya Rehman, Researcher
  181. Zubeida Mustafa

February 25, 2018 - Comments Off on Statement: Civil society strongly condemns behaviour of LEAs in blasphemy case

Statement: Civil society strongly condemns behaviour of LEAs in blasphemy case

February 26, 2018
PRESS RELEASE

Subject: Civil society strongly condemns behaviour of law enforcement authorities in alleged blasphemy case

Civil society organisations and concerned citizens have issued a strong condemnation of the torture, inhumane treatment and sexual abuse of Patras Masih and Sajid Masih by the Cyber Crime Wing, FIA in Lahore. The statement in its entirety can be found here: https://digitalrightsfoundation.pk/demands-to-the-ministry-civil-society-strongly-condemns-behaviour-of-law-enforcement-authorities-in-blasphemy-case/.

The 17 year-old accused, Patras Masih, was accused of allegedly posting blasphemous material on social media. Masih belongs to the Christian community in Shahdara, which has been under siege since the last week by the Tehreek Labaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLYR) and other religious parties who demanded Masid be punished and incited violence against the family. These threats have endangered the entire Christian community living in Dhir village in Shahdara Town, resulting in some fleeing their homes. An FIR was registered against Patras (FIR No. 174/18) on February 19 at the Shahdara Town Police Station under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code.

On February 23, 2018,  Patras Masih and his cousin, Sajid Masih, were in the custody of the FIA at the Lahore headquarters when the abuse by law enforcement officials took place. Around 6:00 PM, Sajid fell off the fourth floor of the FIA building resulting in serious injuries to his head and body. It has come to light that Sajid and Patras were tortured by officers of the cyber crime wing and were coerced into sexually assaulting one another. Sajid, pleaded with them to stop. As a last resort, in order to escape the torture and sexual abuse, he jumped off the fourth floor of the FIA building, where the cyber crime wing is located. Sajid is currently in the hospital recovering from his injuries. Nighat Dad, Executive Director of Digital Rights Foundation, pointed out that “as a law enforcement body, it is the duty of the FIA to ensure that there are safeguards in place to ensure that the accused are accorded their rights. It is the bedrock of the criminal justice system and the FIA has failed to do so in this case.”

In a statement signed by more than 150 collectives, civil society organisations and concerned citizens serious concerns were raised regarding the treatment of marginalised groups by law enforcement agencies, specifically religious minorities. The state has a heightened duty to protect persecuted groups. Given the history of the blasphemy law being misused to target minority groups, it is egregious that the FIA completely failed to provide any security to the accused and the family. The law enforcement authorities have not only failed in their duty to protect minorities, but have actively participated in violence against them.

In a series of demands, the government has been called upon to immediately withdraw the FIR for attempted suicide against Sajid and ensure that the accused and their family are provided with effective security. Demands has also been made to conduct an independent inquiry into the matter and penalise any abuse of power by the concerned officials. The statement also calls for effective oversight of law enforcement agencies to hold them accountable and prevent abuse of power. Special protocols and procedures should be in place to deal with cases, such as blasphemy, where the lives of the accused are in danger. Lastly, the statement cautions against the proposed amendments to add blasphemy offences to the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016, given the inability of the state to protect those accused under the law.

The statement has been endorsed by organisations such as Huma Rights Commission of Pakistan, Digital Rights Foundation (DRF), Bolo Bhi, National Commission for Justice and Peace (NCJP), South Asian Partnership Pakistan (SAP-PK), Shirkatgah, Minorities Rights Watch as well as collectives including Girls at Dhabas, Women’s Action Forum Chapters of Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad, Hyderabad and Peshawar, the Feminist Collective, Network of Journalists for Digital Rights and Women United for Digital Rights.

Contact Information
Nighat Dad
[email protected]

February 12, 2018 - Comments Off on Digital Rights Foundation mourns death of feminist icon Asma Jahangir

Digital Rights Foundation mourns death of feminist icon Asma Jahangir

Photo: Wolfgang Schmidt

Photo: Wolfgang Schmidt

We are shocked and saddened by the death of Pakistan’s foremost human rights activist and feminist lawyer Asma Jahangir. Her death is not just a loss for the entire country, but a personal blow for younger activists who have always looked to her as their role model and leader in trying times.

As a woman-led organisation, we are indebted to the path that Asma paved for us through Pakistan’s first women-run law firm, AGHS. As a team consisting of lawyers and young feminists, we stand on Asma’s shoulders and tread the path blazed by her.

For a women’s rights organisation, Asma has built the framework that we operate in, carved the tools that we use to assert our rights and set the standards that we strive for. Asma fought tirelessly for the right of women to chose; her exceptional  contributions are too numerous to recount. She successfully took up Saima Waheed case, which guaranteed the right of adult women to make their own choice in marriage--one of the most important cases in Pakistan’s legal history.

Asma has set the gold standard for principled stances. Her work to uphold the freedom of expression is particularly close to what we stand for and we hope to carry on her legacy. Asma stood shoulder to shoulder with us in our opposition to the draconian cyber crime bill, and having her as an ally lifted our spirits and bolstered our cause. We knew that Asma could always be counted on. We are devastated to have lost our pillar of support.

As a feminist, Asma was unapologetic in the positions she took and was unfazed by the hatred that was directed at her. Being a woman in the public eye, she was not shy of being political and did not allow herself to be weighed down by propaganda and sexist rhetoric directed at her. Asma was firm in her convictions and demonstrated lifelong commitment to the cause of democratic freedoms. She appeared in the history books at the remarkable age of 20 when she appeared in court to represent her father, Malik Ghulam Jilani, who was jailed by the military government of Yahya Khan.

Asma has always been a role model for younger feminists; a household name. While Asma, as a lawyer, a human rights activist, and as a person, is irreplaceable, we hope to replicate her resilience and courage as younger feminists stepping into these public forums.

We offer our deepest condolences to Asma’s family, friends, and all those across the world whose lives were touched by Asma’s unfettered resilience and support. It’s an end of an era, but certainly not an end of her legacy.

February 2, 2018 - Comments Off on Digital Rights Foundation Launched Report: “Digital (in)Security of Journalists in Pakistan”

Digital Rights Foundation Launched Report: “Digital (in)Security of Journalists in Pakistan”

PRESS RELEASE
Digital Rights Foundation
January 2, 2018

DIGITAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION LAUNCHED REPORT: “DIGITAL (IN)SECURITY OF JOURNALISTS IN PAKISTAN”

Digital Rights Foundation (DRF) conducted a nationwide survey on the state of security of journalists to shed light on the threats and concerns journalists face online, which runs parallel to the harassment journalists face offline. This report, titled “Digital (In)Security of Journalists in Pakistan” seeks to map and understand the digital risks that journalists face in Pakistan and suggests policy interventions based on the data collected.

66% of the journalists who participated in the survey responded that they had suffered online insecurity. Journalists face issues of digital security in various ways including blackmail, hacking, threats, sexual harassment, data theft, stalking, and attacks through malware or phishing emails. The survey was divided in two parts; the first part inquired journalists’ understanding of digital security. The second part was only addressed to journalists who had experienced online threats or harassment – 68% of total respondents had faced online threats or harassment, hence proving that the majority is exposed  to online insecurity.

The second part of the survey was focused on online harassment and the gendered nature of digital insecurity. 72% of female journalists and 61% of male journalists experienced digital insecurity. When female journalists were asked how the harassment of female and male journalists differs, 71% reported that female journalists are more likely to be attacked on their appearance. Similarly, 68% of them also believe that female journalists are attacked more than male journalists on their personal lives.

In another question, we asked journalists how online insecurity affected their journalism careers. 45.5% respondents said that online insecurity resulted in self-censorship. The survey learnt that 92% of the respondents believe that online harassment in journalism is either “extremely common” or “common”. Only 8% of respondents believe that online harassment is rare or extremely rare.

This report seeks to posit recommendations to lawmakers with reference to the under-consideration Journalist Protection Bill. The first draft of the Bill did not include provisions for the digital security of journalists, thus the aim of this report is to advocate for lawmakers to also consider that journalists be protected online to keep censorship at bay, and to safeguard their mental health, quality of work, physical security of journalists and freedom of the press.

The report also found a dire need for organizations to realize the nature of this threat and for them to conduct trainings for digital security and privacy. Only 24% of the respondents  reported to have received training of digital security and privacy, and a good 76% remain unaware of the possible ways to tackle this issue.  Media organizations fail their employees in another way as 60% of the respondents admitted that their media organization has no policy to report or deal with online threats/harassment. And the 42% of the journalists who filed a complaint were given no follow up.

Federal Investigation Agency (FIA)’s National Response Centre for Cyber Crime (NR3C) has failed to make a substantial change on two counts. While the FIA set up the NR3C almost a decade ago, they have failed to disseminate information about how digital threats and crimes can be reported to them. Thus, out of all the respondents who face digital insecurity, only 9% reported their cases to the FIA. This number, again, goes to show that the cyber crime wing is hardly being used the way it was meant to be. DRF has submitted recommendations to the NR3C from a victim-based approach that include greater accessibility and complainant-friendly practices.

Digital Rights Foundation is a registered research-based advocacy non-governmental organization in Pakistan. Founded by Nighat Dad in 2012, DRF focuses on ICTs to support human rights, inclusiveness, democratic processes, and digital governance. DRF works on issues of online free speech, privacy, data protection and online violence against women. DRF has worked with several journalists through workshops to provide them with digital security tools, established a “Network of Female Journalists for Digital Security” and published a guidebook titled “Digital Security for Journalists”.

Contact person:
Nighat Dad, Executive Director, Digital Rights Foundation
[email protected]

November 26, 2017 - Comments Off on Press Release: DRF and NetBlocks find blanket and nation-wide ban on social media in Pakistan and demand it to be lifted immediately

Press Release: DRF and NetBlocks find blanket and nation-wide ban on social media in Pakistan and demand it to be lifted immediately

The NetBlocks https://netblocks.org internet shutdown observatory project in coordination with the Digital Rights Foundation https://digitalrightsfoundation.pk/ has collected evidence of nation-wide internet disruptions throughout Pakistan.
On the afternoon of Saturday 25 November, internet users reported disruptions affecting key social media platforms amid protests. The present investigation seeks to provide an early determination of the extent of those restrictions.
Between 16:00 pm and 11:00pm on 25th November 2017, measurements from 121 unique vantage points distributed through 16 ASNs (Autonomous System Numbers) covering major cities and regions in Pakistan were collected, geolocated and anonymised via the NetBlocks web probe measurement network.
Twitter and Facebook are currently restricted with mobile operators Mobilink, Zong, Telenor, Ufone and fixed providers PTCL, Witribe, Zong and Cybernet. Our data indicates that YouTube restrictions are only partially implemented, suggesting that many internet users in Pakistan will still be able to access the video streaming service. Availability of other services has not yet been investigated. A control set of international news websites remained reachable, indicating that the restrictions are targeted to suppress social media coverage of the unrest. The restrictions remain in effect at the time of writing.
A summary of the data is available in CSV format https://netblocks.org/files/netblocks-pk-25-11-2017.csv for examination and may be used with credit. This report is provided as an early indicator during an ongoing crisis situation; we expect our investigation to be supported by more detailed technical evaluation.
Cities specifically found to be affected include Karachi, Lahore, Faisalabad, Rawalpindi, Gujranwala, Islamabad, Quetta and Peshawar while the data suggests the restrictions are in affect nationwide, save for a small number of outliers which appear remain able to access the services.
Digital Rights Foundation demands the suspension of the blanket and nation-wide ban on social media and channels of communication as it does not serve the principles of freedom of expression and proportionality. While the government can take measures to ensure the security of Pakistani citizens, it is important to strike a balance between censorship and security.


NetBlocks.org is a global network observatory that monitors Internet shutdowns, network disruptions, and cybersecurity incidents and their relation to politics and conflict in real-time.
Digital Rights Foundation (DRF) is a research and advocacy NGO based in Pakistan that focuses on how ICT can support human rights, democratic processes and digital governance. It works towards a world where all people, and especially women, are able to safely exercise their right of expression.

June 21, 2017 - Comments Off on Statement of Support #RecoverAishaAndAlyaan

Statement of Support #RecoverAishaAndAlyaan

Digital Rights Foundation and Girls at Dhabas condemn the attack on Asma Jahangir’s associates from AGHS Legal Aid Cell - comprising a female lawyer and two male lawyers - inside a courtroom at the Lahore High Court yesterday morning, i.e. June 20, 2017, by a large group of about 60 to 70 lawyers. This group was present on the court premises to bully Ms. Asma’s team on behalf of Maqsood Buttar, member of Pakistan Bar Council. The presiding judge in the courtroom was Justice Abdul Sami Khan.

Asma and her team have been representing a poor woman who filed a petition to find her missing daughter, 26-year-old Aisha, and grandson, Alyaan. According to the petitioner, Aisha was secretly married to Maqsood Buttar and gave birth to his son. Both Aisha and Alyaan disappeared over 6 months ago. According to Aisha’s mother, after giving birth to Alyaan, Aisha started demanding that Maqsood treat both of them equally, like he would his other family. As a result, Maqsood was repeatedly violent and abusive towards her, up and until her disappearance, along with Alyaan’s.

Yesterday, at the Lahore High Court, 60 to 70 lawyers entered the court premises, disrupting proceedings, chanting insulting slogans and hurling abuses to address Asma Jahangir and her associates (terms such as “gashti” and “agent” were hurled at them). Noor Ejaz Chaudhry, the female associate who was present in court, was told to stay in her “aukaat” and harassed, and when her colleague, Osama Malik, came forward to defend her, he was manhandled and thrashed by some of the lawyers present. His clothes were torn apart and he was dragged out of the courtroom. All this happened in the presence of the judge, and the associates had to be given a backdoor to escape this violent scene.

The legal fraternity in Pakistan is rife with sexism, misogyny and injustice, as can be seen by such occurrences. Incidents like these happen frequently within our courtrooms and law firms. Systematic issues such as the overall lack of female judges in our higher judiciary and hostile courtroom environment makes work extremely difficult, and, at times, dangerous. Our female lawyers do not just fight legal battles; they endure horror stories every single day. The majority of men in the legal fraternity deliberately subject their female colleagues and peers to harassment in their professional lives. Let us not forget that Pakistan is the only South Asian country that has never had a female judge in its apex court, i.e. the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Moreover, as rightly pointed out by Reema Omer of the International Commission of Jurists, the Pakistan Bar Council has never had a female member in over 40 years of its establishment.

Bar politics and intimidation by lawyers is another problem that has impeded justice and resulted in the harassment of several litigants. The abuse of power and mobilization flies in the face of tall claims of access to justice and litigant-friendly courts. Abuse of power and violence is openly flouted by lawyers who instead of protecting and defending the most vulnerable among us, continue to misuse their power and political clout with impunity. This instance is a clear obstruction of justice and an attempt to wrongly protect lawyers within the fraternity.

There needs to be strong and categorical rulings ordering strict measures against lawyers who routinely harass women. It is extremely important to end impunity of lawyers engaging in such offensive conduct and to ensure that there are repercussions for those who deliberately engage in such behaviour. Furthermore, such measures will ensure that members of the legal fraternity are well aware of the fact that their words and/or actions represent discrimination and/or harassment. Judges need to take strict action to ensure that their courtroom is free of discrimination of any sort, and that nobody present during the hearing is mistreated. There needs to be a larger conversation, at all levels of the court system and legal fraternity, regarding the underrepresentation of women and the harassment that they face.

We stand in solidarity with Aisha’s mother, as well as Asma and her associates, and hope to find answers regarding the disappearance of Aisha and her son Alyaan. Addressing what happened yesterday, and resolving the case in question, is necessary to prevent more unfortunate episodes and miscarriages of justice like these from taking place.

#MisogynyinPkCourts #RecoverAishaAndAlyaan

May 1, 2017 - Comments Off on DRF and Girls@Dhabas Condemn the Cyber Harassment of Amar Sindhu and Arfana Mallah

DRF and Girls@Dhabas Condemn the Cyber Harassment of Amar Sindhu and Arfana Mallah

Zara zor se Bolo: Azadi!

We, the Digital Rights Foundation and Girls at Dhabas, strongly condemn the cyber-harassment, abuse and intimidation that well-known professors and activists of Pakistan Arfana Mallah and Amar Sindhu have been subjected to over the past four months.

Amar Sindhu is a Sindhi poet and a professor of philosophy at Jamshoro University, while Arfana Mallah is a professor of chemistry at Jamshoro University and the head of its teachers’ union. Both are the leading lights behind the Khanabadosh Writers Cafe in Hyderabad, which has helped to revive cultural life in the city along progressive lines. As longstanding members of the Women Action Forum, both Professor Amar Sindhu and Professor Arfana Mallah have ceaselessly struggled for gender, human rights, and political justice in Sindh and the country at large.

While the paths of feminists are never easy in a deeply patriarchal context, the threats and intimidation tactics against them have amplified in the past few months and have frighteningly evolved into concerted efforts to slander and undermine their individual credibility in online and offline spaces. The abuse that they have suffered has included:

  • threats of acid attack, burning, and other forms of physical violence
  • propaganda that they are “anti-national” and an “agent”
  • character assassination on social media with repeated declarations that they are “randi”, “be ghairat”, “bad kirdar” and “fahash”
  • professional maligning through false claims that they are incompetent teachers and shirking their teaching responsibilities
  • shaming them because of the sari as an occasional choice of dress
  • shaming them as being “over-emotional” and “pseudo”
  • demeaning them through classic, misogynist slurs used against courageous and gutsy feminists: that they are “unhappy, single women” who are “half-crazy”

In light of Mashal Khan’s chilling murder, the present pressure cooker conditions engulfing Amar and Arfana are alarming and deserve immediate attention. The Jamshoro campus represents a volatile situation that has escalated, and isolated the two activists. We are concerned that the intense, targeted social media invective against them is designed to prepare groundwork for actual physical assault at the remotest opportunity.

What is even more horrific and noteworthy about the whole situation is that the slander campaign against them is being led by so-called progressive men, who pride themselves on being intellectuals, academics, human rights defenders, nationalists and secular leftists. Have the harassers been paid to engage in this intimidation campaign, or are they just revealing the misogyny and toxic masculinity that often lies beneath the progressive veneer? Many of these bro-gressives hide behind their progressive facade, while unleashing the worst forms of misogyny against women who speak up. On some occasions, Amar Sindhu has received vitriolic, abusive lashing on social media simply for stating her opinion on current political trends in Sindh.

If a man expresses a political opinion, it is considered his opinion and nothing more. If a woman expresses a political opinion e.g. on PTI as happened to be the case, she faces a social media lynch mob. The intention is to put the woman in her place, silence her political speech, and marginalize her from public discourse. We wish to note here that in 2004, Amar Sindhu and three other women were accused of blasphemy in a case of systematic victimization by the then secretary of the Sindhi Adabi Board. They were cleared eventually through an independent investigation - the first of its kind that was undertaken in Sindh. Shockingly, Amar Sindhu also suffered bullet injuries in 2010 when she was participating in the teachers’ movement against the VC of Sindh University (https://www.dawn.com/news/733027/amar-sindhu-injured-in-attack). For their principled stance, both Dr. Arfana and Dr. Amar were fired along with five other faculty members, but eventually restored after much struggle.

It is when women dare to leave the domestic spaces and roles that patriarchal society has chosen for them, and participate as equal human beings in the social, institutional, and political life of society that the most amount of violence is directed at them. Instead of valuing women’s voices and roles in social and institutional settings, progressive men and regressive men work together - often with the support of other patriarchal women - to ensure that women’s tongues are silenced, their rights denied, they are bullied with written and legal threats, and their professional and social status decimated.

We would thus like to situate Amar and Arfana’s case in the larger context of harassment against women, particularly in academia and activist circles in Pakistan where there has recently been an increased backlash against women who speak up. Whether it is the case of misogynists acting against the Digital Rights Foundation, the case of harassment in public universities like Karachi University, or cases in private universities like LUMS or Habib, the repercussions of dissent and calling out abusive men is unflinching retaliation. This is met with outright support, victim-shaming, apologetic attitude, conditionalities for solidarity, bystander behaviour, avoidance, or silence by an even larger community of men who consider themselves progressive.

 We find such hypocrisy pathetic and deeply disturbing: the men who might praise Faiz and recite “bol” shudder in their shoes when courageous women - after systematic trauma - find the strength to actually speak.

We, in Karachi and Lahore and Islamabad, are inspired by the work and warmth of these two powerful feminists, academics and activists. We stand in firm solidarity with them, we openly declare how much we love and adore them, and how grateful we are for their true patriotism. Against worsening odds, it is the sustained struggle of veteran feminists in reclaiming public, political and institutional spaces that enables us younger feminists to do our work in the world. Together, we strive for and realize a better Pakistan.

Towards this goal, we demand civil society members of Sindh to call out so-called progressive men who engage in maligning, abusing, and victmizing Arfana Mallah and Amar Sindhu, and we urge institutions all over Pakistan to strengthen and safeguard the rights of women.