A cabinet committee reviewing Bangladesh’s draft Cyber Security (Amendment) Act, 2026, has reached an in-principle agreement to require prior permission from a competent court before any journalist, media owner, or responsible person can be arrested over news published or broadcast by media outlets.
The meeting was chaired by Posts, Telecommunications and Information Technology Minister Fakir Mahbub Anam at the Posts and Telecommunications Division’s conference room on Wednesday. Home Minister Salahuddin Ahmad and State Minister for Foreign Affairs Shama Obaed Islam were among those present. Officials stressed that the law must not become a tool for harassing journalists or undermining free and independent journalism.
A statement from the ministry said the committee gave the highest importance to feedback from journalists and media representatives while refining the draft. Discussions covered the need for due legal process when taking action against media professionals, clearer separation of defamation, disparagement, and cyberbullying provisions, a more precise definition of cyberspace, and alignment of defamation rules with the Penal Code.
Participants also stressed the importance of tighter, more specific definitions of “rumour” and “misinformation” so that vague or overly broad language does not erode press freedom.
Other points discussed included excluding mobile-court powers from the law, requiring written notice and reasons before content is removed or blocked, setting time limits for deciding requests to unblock content, and giving media organisations written notice and a chance to respond before any action is taken. The composition of the Cyber Security Council, media representation on it, and consultations with the United Nations, development partners, and international technology platforms such as Meta were also raised. The revised draft is expected to be published online for further public comments.
Speakers at the meeting said the law must strike a balance between preventing genuine cybercrime and protecting citizens’ rights, freedom of expression, and media freedom. A presentation was given by the National Cyber Security Agency. Senior officials, including ICT Division Secretary Mamunur Rashid Bhuiyan and Posts and Telecommunications Division Secretary Md. Kamruzzaman also attended.
National and International Concerns
These proposed safeguards come against a long record of controversial digital laws in Bangladesh. Section 57 of the Information and Communication Technology Act (2006), the Digital Security Act (DSA) of 2018, and the Cyber Security Act (CSA) of 2023 were repeatedly criticised for vague offences that enabled arbitrary arrests of journalists, activists, and critics.
Studies documented thousands of DSA cases; journalists formed a large share of those accused. Many were arrested without warrants, often at night, and faced overlapping cases. Most prosecutions never reached trial or ended in acquittal, yet the process created a strong chilling effect. Writer Mushtaq Ahmed died in custody in 2021 after months under the DSA, drawing widespread protests.
Amnesty International described the 2023 CSA as largely “repackaging repression”, retaining the bulk of the DSA’s problematic provisions. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and organisations including Human Rights Watch, the Committee to Protect Journalists, ARTICLE 19, and the Clooney Foundation for Justice had long called for repeal or major reform, arguing that the laws failed tests of legality, necessity, and proportionality under international standards such as Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
After the 2024 political transition, the interim government replaced the CSA with a Cyber Security Ordinance in 2025 that removed some of the most criticised clauses. However, the subsequent Cyber Security Act framework and the 2026 amendment drafts have again raised alarms.
Critics, including Transparency International Bangladesh, editors’ bodies, and international monitors, have pointed to vague definitions of rumour, misinformation, defamation, and related terms, expanded content-blocking powers, and the risk that public-interest journalism could be criminalised.
The Editors’ Council and others specifically demanded judicial authorisation before arrests or searches related to reporting, exclusion of mobile courts, and stronger procedural safeguards.