Highlights:
- Judicial approval sought for searches and surveillance involving journalists
- Public-interest reporting and political criticism should remain protected
- Emergency content blocking should face review within 48 hours
- Council urges stronger Press Council powers and independence
The Sampadak Parishad, or Editors' Council, has proposed 12 safeguards for the proposed Cyber Security (Amendment) Act, 2026, seeking stronger protection for independent journalism, public-interest reporting and freedom of expression.
The council said the proposed legislation, which has yet to be finalised, must balance efforts to tackle cybercrime with the protection of press freedom and the public's right to information.
It also called for clear legal grounds, transparency, judicial oversight and effective remedies in cases involving content removal or blocking, arrests, searches, seizures, surveillance and access to digital information.
Journalism and public-interest reporting need protection
The council said news reports, investigative journalism, analysis and opinions published as part of professional duties or in the public interest should not be treated as cybercrime merely because of their content or critical stance.
Public-interest reporting, fair criticism, opinion, satire, cartoons, parody, consumer complaints, political criticism and unintentional professional errors should not attract criminal liability, it said. Offences related to freedom of expression should also remain bailable.
The proposed law should explicitly protect reporting and analysis concerning corruption, abuse of power, financial irregularities, environmental damage, public health, consumer rights, government expenditure and irregularities in public and private institutions.
Criticism of the government, state institutions, public officials, elected representatives and government policies, along with political opinion, analysis, satire and irony, should not be classified as cybercrime, the council added.
It opposed vague phrases such as "demeaning the state" and called for clear definitions of concepts relating to state security and relations with foreign countries.
Judicial approval sought for action against journalists
The council recommended that arrests, searches, seizures, access to digital devices or data, and surveillance in cases directly related to journalists' professional work require prior court approval.
Where emergency action is unavoidable, subsequent judicial approval or review should be mandatory within 48 hours. Such cases should also remain bailable, it said.
Clear definitions of false information and online offences
The council said incorrect or incomplete information should not automatically constitute a criminal offence.
It called for separate definitions of false information, disinformation and rumours, stressing that information should not be criminalised merely because it remains unverified or lacks supporting evidence.
The legislation should also clearly define bullying, defamation, humiliation, conduct insulting to the state, relations with foreign states, sexual harassment and sextortion.
Transparency in content removal and blocking
Any order to remove or block news reports, posts, videos or other digital content should have a clear legal basis, written reasons and an explanation of why the action is necessary, the council said.
Except in emergencies, the affected person or organisation should have an opportunity to respond. Every order should be open to appeal and judicial review.
Emergency blocking should be subject to court approval or review within 48 hours. The council also called for public disclosure of information about content removed or blocked under the law.
Defamation complaints should go to Press Council
The Editors' Council said online defamation should not be treated as a new or more severe cybercrime.
Instead, complaints involving defamation, news publication, professional conduct, journalistic ethics or media responsibility should, where appropriate, be handled through the Bangladesh Press Council's existing complaint and inquiry mechanisms rather than direct criminal proceedings.
The council also opposed the use of mobile courts or executive authorities to adjudicate disputes involving news publication, freedom of expression, defamation or journalistic content.
Arrests, fines, content removal and other punitive measures in such cases should be subject to judicial oversight, it said.
Media outlets should not face collective punishment
The council said an entire media organisation should not face closure, cancellation of registration or disproportionate punishment because of an individual report or publication.
Such complaints should instead be addressed through the Press Council, it said, calling for the modernisation of the council's jurisdiction and effectiveness to bring relevant digital news media within its scope.
It also described source protection as a fundamental principle of journalism, arguing that journalists should not be compelled to disclose the identities of their sources.
Independent oversight of cyber security powers
The Editors' Council recommended transforming the National Cyber Security Council into a multi-stakeholder body capable of independently overseeing agencies exercising powers of investigation, arrest, search, seizure, surveillance and content removal.
The body should include experts in cybersecurity, law and human rights, alongside people experienced in media and editorial leadership, it said.
The council called for clear rules governing the oversight body's composition, the independence of its members, limits on investigators' powers and accountability for decisions. Decisions and policy recommendations involving public interest should also be made transparent.
In its concluding remarks, the Editors' Council said cybersecurity, cybercrime and journalism in the digital sphere were distinct areas, but the proposed legislation did not always establish sufficiently clear boundaries between them.
It urged the government to reconsider the draft law to ensure that efforts to strengthen cybersecurity and tackle genuine cybercrime do not undermine independent journalism, public-interest reporting and freedom of expression.
A secure digital Bangladesh and a free media were not opposing goals, the council said, adding that both could be strengthened through appropriate laws, transparency, judicial oversight and accountability.