Arguably, 2024 could be the most significant year for elections in recent memory. Last December, Time Magazine reported that globally, more voters than ever in history will head to the polls in 2024, with at least 64 countries (plus the European Union) due to hold national elections. A combined global population of about 49% is due to vote in national elections this year.
Halfway into 2024, several countries in the South Asian region such as Bangladesh, Pakistan and India have already had their national elections. Sri Lanka is due to hold its presidential election in October, with a general election to follow soon after.
This year of global elections also comes at a time of rapid technological growth, with the astonishing pace of development in Artificial Intelligence (AI) eliciting both intense excitement and serious concern.
Concerns that AI will be used to manipulate public opinion and spread misinformation have already been proved right. AI-generated deepfakes – digital content manipulated using artificial intelligence – were used during the recently concluded Indian general election.
Many countries in the region have already experienced the destructive impact of online disinformation and misinformation. These include the rapid spread of hate-speech, ethnic riots, targeting of minorities, and attacks on specific individuals who have been singled out for harassment. The response from most governments in the face of such incidents has been heavy-handed and often at the expense of violations of freedom of expression. Measures taken include arbitrarily arresting persons accused of spreading hate-speech or misinformation, as well as imposing social media blackouts. While the threat from online misinformation and disinformation is very real, governments have also tended to use it as an excuse to clamp down on dissent. This includes many governments in the South Asian region.
A recent report titled “Social Media Regulation and the Rule of Law: Key Trends in Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh”, which was launched recently in Colombo, makes the observation that “Censorship under the guise of state security concerns has curtailed legally permissible speech in all three countries, highlighting issues with overly broad and vague language, used to codify online and general speech-related offences.”
Indian authorities, for example, have been accused of frequently using internet shutdowns to stifle political protests and criticism of the government. Media reports note that at least 509 apps including TikTok have been banned by Indian authorities in recent years. Human Rights Watch (HRW) observed that in February 2024, just two months before the first phase of the country’s general election was due to begin, Indian authorities arbitrarily used their powers to block online content and accounts of its critics and journalists on social media platforms.
In Bangladesh, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s government recently returned to office for a fourth consecutive term in a parliamentary election that was boycotted by the main opposition party as a sham after mass arrests of its supporters. An HRW report accused Bangladesh authorities of suppressing dissent including by arresting people for criticising the government on social media. The report noted that experts have raised concerns that Bangladesh’s Cyber Security Act, introduced in September 2023 to replace the 2018 Digital Security Act (DSA), “maintains the same abusive elements.” It added that hundreds have been arrested under the DSA, which was used to stifle freedom of expression and punish government critics.
Authorities in Pakistan also have a history of imposing internet shutdowns. The government has been accused of multiple such shutdowns during the latest election cycle. An internet shut down in May 2023 targeted mobile and social media platforms amidst protests following the arrest of opposition leader and former Prime Minister Imran Khan. Access to social media was blocked again in December 2023 and on two separate occasions in January this year, which opposition parties say interfered with their online election campaigns.
In Sri Lanka, social media blackouts have been imposed by the government on several instances in recent years. These include immediately after the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks and during the mass protests that erupted during the 2022 economic crisis. Authorities have also used different laws to arrest those suspected to have spread hate speech or false information. Citizens have been arrested under laws such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and the Computer Crime Act (CCA).
The latest addition to these laws is the Online Safety Act (OSA) which was passed by Parliament under controversial circumstances in January this year. At the time, opposition parties and activists charged that some of the amendments suggested by the Supreme Court to make the Act compliant with the Constitution had not been included. The Supreme Court subsequently dismissed a petition filed in this regard on the grounds that the Constitution prevents post-legislative scrutiny of Acts passed by Parliament ‘on any ground whatsoever.’
Though the notion of protecting women and children from online crimes was touted by the government as the main driving force behind the OSA, critics allege that it is yet another dangerous tool that can be used to crack down on dissent. The OSA will establish a powerful Online Safety Commission which the legislation’s critics say can use provisions of the Act to decide what constitutes a “false statement.” Hefty fines running into millions of rupees and prison sentences of up to five years can be imposed on those found guilty of offences under the Act.
While the Online Safety Commission is yet to be constituted, it is entirely possible that it could be done so before the presidential election. In such a scenario, there is always the danger that the OSA can be used to crack down on statements that may be deemed by authorities to be ‘false’ because it does not tally with the government’s version.
Sri Lanka has already seen how legislation such as the PTA and ICCPR Act have been weaponized to go after those who hold controversial or dissenting views. Poet Ahnaf Jazeem for example, was arrested in May, 2020 under the PTA and spent 18 months in remand custody on charges of spreading extremism through his book “Navarasam” and also imparting extremist ideology to his students. He was subsequently acquitted by the Puttalam High Court. Likewise, social media commentator Ramzy Razeek was arrested under the ICCPR Act and the CCA in April, 2020 after he posted on Facebook advocating for an “ideological jihad” using the pen and keyboard to counter propaganda against Muslims by Sinhala Buddhist extremists. In November last year, the Supreme Court ruled that the arrest under the ICCPR Act had violated Razeek’s fundamental rights, and ordered the State to pay him compensation.
Likewise, the OSA too could be used in the run-up to the election to go after those who hold views that run counter to the government’s narrative. For example, if a person takes to social media to dispute the government’s statistics on the country’s economic recovery or criticise its economic policy, there is a likelihood of he or she being accused of spreading “false information” as deemed by the Online Safety Commission and prosecuted. The Act may indeed result in a chilling effect, where social media users would have to think twice about airing views that may be deemed to run contrary to the official version for fear of being prosecuted under the OSA. Opposition activists and politicians who are vocal critics of the government may especially become targets for prosecution under the OSA in the run-up to the election and even during the campaign period itself, severely obstructing their ability to conduct an effective polls campaign. As such, if applied arbitrarily, laws such as the OSA, ICCPR and PTA, together with other measures such as social media blackouts, risk disrupting the holding of a free and fair election in Sri Lanka at a crucial juncture in its economic, social, and governance cycles.
