The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has directed the federal government, the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) and the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) to submit comprehensive reports on how laws against online harassment, blackmail and the unauthorised circulation of private material are being enforced.
Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir issued the interim order on a petition filed by Dr Raana Ahsan. The court said the petition raised substantial questions of public importance, including online safety, misuse of electronic, digital and broadcast media, the effectiveness of existing regulatory mechanisms and the protection of the fundamental rights of the citizens.
The order cited PTA statistics on compliance with requests to block unlawful online content. Compliance stood at 59.01 percent for matters concerning security and defence, 79.51 percent for terrorism-related content, 76.28 percent for contempt of court, 76.54 percent for content against the glory of Islam, 40.38 percent for defamation or impersonation, 98.91 percent for decency and morality, and 67.43 percent for sectarian or hate speech.
By platform, compliance was 48.42 percent for Twitter, 78.57 percent for Facebook, 79.52 percent for Instagram, 87.34 percent for YouTube and 88.68 percent for TikTok. The court said the figures required a considered explanation.
According to the PTA report, social media companies were asked to meet registration requirements and appoint local compliance and grievance officers after the relevant rules were notified in October 2021. No affirmative response has been received.
The PTA said its limited powers had confined it to approaching platforms for content removal or taking technical measures against their services, and that operators often declined requests citing their community guidelines.
The court noted that the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), 2016, provides for the Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority (SMRA).
Its functions include online safety, protection of the rights of users, regulation and enlistment of platforms, and removal or blocking of unlawful content. The law also provides for binding directions to platforms, a Social Media Protection Tribunal and a Social Media Complaint Council.
The court directed all respondents to report on measures taken to implement legal provisions on online safety, unlawful content, protection of children and other vulnerable users, prevention of harassment and blackmail, and redress of complaints. They must also explain the compliance statistics, the follow-up action taken in cases of non-compliance and proposals to improve enforcement.
The PTA was specifically asked to explain the practical and legal difficulties it has faced in enforcing its directions, why coercive provisions were not invoked, what steps were taken to invoke them, and why registration requirements were not effectively implemented.
The court also directed the federal government, through the Interior Secretary, to convene a meeting of the Ministry of Information Technology, Pemra, the PTA, the NCCIA and other relevant bodies. The meeting will identify areas needing inter-agency coordination, clarify statutory responsibilities and formulate a coordinated enforcement mechanism.
It will also examine the difficulties raised in the PTA report, legal remedies against non-compliant platforms and measures to ensure prompt handling of complaints. Attendees must be officers familiar with the legal framework and authorised to propose practical measures.
A joint report must then be submitted detailing the matters discussed, deficiencies identified, measures agreed, responsibilities assigned and an implementation framework with a timeline.
Each respondent must also identify any legislative, administrative, technical or institutional obstacles and the steps taken or proposed to address them, supported by relevant notifications, directions, policies and correspondence.
The court clarified that the directions are meant to facilitate effective implementation of the law and that nothing in the order requires any authority to act beyond its statutory mandate or disregard procedural safeguards. The matter will be heard next on November 23, 2026.
