PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court on Wednesday issued notice to federal government, seeking its response within a month to a petition challenging the changes made to cybercrime law.

A bench consisting of Justice Syed Arshad Ali and Justice Qazi Jawad Ehsanullah heard the petition filed by a social media activist, Anil Masih, praying the court to strike down Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act, 2025. The petitioner said that the law was in violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

He requested the court to specifically declare unconstitutional Section 26(A) of the Act, dealing with false and fake information, and related provisions as those were vague, arbitrary and violative of the rightsto freedom of expression, privacy and due process.

The petitioner has raised concerns over violations of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of Pakistan. He has also sought interim relief from court, requesting that registration of FIRs under the impugned Act might be halted.

The petition included as respondent s federal government through secretary of law and justice, secretaries of ministries of interior and information and broadcasting, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government through its chief secretary, FIA director general, PTA chairman and Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority chairman.

Advocate Nouman Muhib Kakakhel appeared for the petitioner and stated that the impugned Prevention of ElectronicCrimes(Amendment) Act was hastily introduced and approved by Senate and National Assembly in January this year with minimal parliamentary debate, bypassing meaningful consultation with stakeholders including journalists and civil society organisations.

He contended that through the impugned Act severe restrictions were imposed onfundamental freedoms including freedom of expression, privacy rights and due process, in violation of the Constitution of Pakistan and international human rights standards.

The counsel said that the amended Act undermined democratic values by criminalising dissent, enabling state overreach and imposing disproportionate penalties for undefined and vague offenses related to digital expression and social media use.

He contended that the law granted excessive powers to regulatory authorities and suppressed independent journalism at the pretext of combating `false and fake` information.

He argued that the amendments infringed upon articles 4, 9, 10, 10-A, 19, 19-A, and 25 of the Constitution by restricting free speech, curbing press freedom and allowing for arbitrary prosecution of digital content creators.

Mr Kakakhel said that establishment of Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority (SMPRA), social media protection tribunals and National Cybercrime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) consolidated unchecked execu-tive control over digital expression, with no judicial oversight.

He stated that the investigatory powers under the amended Act had been enhanced to an alarming degree, making previously bailable offences now nonbailable, cognisable and noncompoundable, which was in violation of established principles of legal fairness and due process.

He said that Pakistan`s commitments under Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and other global conventions were being disregarded.

He claimed that the impugned Act introduced broad definitions of `unlawful` and `offensive` content, creating legal uncertainty and fostering an environment of fear and selfcensorship among journalists and activists.

He contended that the unchecked power to block or remove online content and entire social media platform without judicial oversight constituted a violation of Article 10-A (right to fair trial) and Article 25 (equality before law) of the Constitution.