Of cyberspace freedom

Ms Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmars pro-democracy leader and an international icon, famously said 21 years ago that "It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it, and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it." Perhaps that explains why authoritarian regimes seem so afraid of the cyberspace while their disgruntled citizenry are so dependent on it.
To borrow the words of Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the British inventor of the World Wide Web, internet is a machine that has no off switch and efforts to block it are doomed to failure. Yet so many governments are ramping up restrictions on the internet, as highlighted in a recent report by Freedom House, a Washington-based independent, pro-democracy watchdog organisation.
Titled Freedom of the Net 2012, the report is a comprehensive study of internet freedom in 47 countries for the period between January 2011 and May 2012. Countries are appraised on aspects like obstacles to internet access, limits on online content, and user rights violations. They are accordingly ranked and categorised as free, partly free and
ot free vis-à-vis internet freedom.
Estonia, USA, Germany, Australia and Hungary are the top five free countries on the 2012 Internet Freedom index. The bottom five countries are Iran, Cuba, China, Syria and Uzbekistan. Pakistan was ranked 36th (not free); below partly free countries of India (20), Turkey (26), Russia (30) and Sri Lanka (32). Within Asia, the Philippines was reported to have the highest degree of internet freedom and China the least.
The report highlights a slow and sporadic process of shrinking internet freedom, amid government efforts to limit online connectivity and infrastructure, blocking and filtering critical content, and arresting or killing online activists. Many governments were using "armies of pro-government bloggers to tout the official viewpoint, discredit opposition activists, or disseminate false information about unfolding events".
Of the 47 countries examined, 20 experienced a negative trajectory since January 2011, with Bahrain, Pakistan, and Ethiopia registering the greatest declines. Interestingly, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Myanmar registered positive trajectory, which shows growing political openness following internal turmoil.
The report mentions Pakistan among the seven countries expected to be at particular risk of suffering immediate setbacks related to internet freedom, alongside Malaysia, Russia, Sri Lanka, Libya, Azerbaijan, and Rwanda. The ubiquitous cellular connectivity and growing internet usage in Pakistan often prompts the authorities here to curb citizen journalism and online activism via these platforms.
The report recaps many such instances in the recent past. These include the VPN ban in 2011, cellular curfew in Balochistan twice, aborted attempts to filter text messages and the nationwide internet firewall, the brief Twitter ban in May this year, and PTA directives in August to block 15 video websites. The report fears that such efforts may intensify as parliamentary elections approach next year.
Despite the Pakistani authorities disjointed and reactive efforts to limit online platforms, it must be appreciated that the level of freedom of expression currently witnessed is unprecedented. Take the social networking scene, for instance, where users are openly criticizing almost all the state organs, with seemingly little fear of prosecution or persecution.
Certain online restrictions are inevitable, but a unilateral government action is undesirable. It is about time that an independent body is formed, which draws representation from across the political-religious spectrum, public sector, academia, civil society and sector experts. Such an organisation must first define the parameters of
ational interests and subsequently issue policy guidelines about the scale and scope of future cyber interventions.