Keep the way for freedom speech

0
298


Digital Security Act

H. M. Hamayet:
Keep the way for freedom of speech The Digital Security Act has been passed in the Parliament on September 19, 2018. It has been widely discussed before the passage of Parliament, and the law is contrary to the Constitution and the freedom of speech, it has clearly identified several issues. The government was repeatedly urging the government not to pass the law so that it can not be passed from different parts of the country and abroad. After the passage of the law, the call has been made to the President from different quarters so that he does not sign it and return to parliament. It is a matter of the President’s own decision to take action in the context of such situation. Meanwhile, the Information Minister has called for a meeting with the journalists. In the letter I sent to the editorial council, the information minister said, “The Secretary-General’s concern regarding the Digital Security Act has taken the concerns and statements of the Information Ministry with utmost care. In this situation, the need to meet the editorial council with the need for quick and acceptable resolution of the issue by upholding the government’s sincerity and respect for the freedom of all media, free flow of information and information. There is a scope for settlement of the matter. It is said in the slightest embarrassment, the information minister said good. But the question is, with the necessity of this matter, if the government’s responsible people had already realized it before taking proper steps, the debate and anxiety would not have been created today. It is also their decision to decide whether the editorial council will sit in the meeting or respond to the call of the Information Minister. But we are more concerned about the general public because of the backwardness of freedom of information and excellence in this era of freedom of expression. I have already said many times that the Digital Security Act passed in Parliament is anti-Constitution. Under this law, the freedom of expression of speech will be thwarted, the way of investigative journalism will be blocked. Detailed explanations of the editorial council are also published in newspapers. The fear of independent and investigative journalism will be hampered due to the Digital Secrets Act being associated with the official secrets act, it is not uncommon. If media freedom is endangered, then there will be more diverse obstacles in front of us. Criticizing, acknowledging the opinions of a democratic state and society. Article 39 (2) of our Constitution stated, “(1) the freedom of thought and conscience is guaranteed, (2) the state’s security, friendly relations with foreign countries, public order, courtesy and morality, or in court for reproach, defamation, defamation or crime Regarding the reasonable restrictions imposed by the law, (a) the freedom of expression and expression of every citizen In 2006, the then government added a political storm or 57 sections of the Information Technology Act in the air. In our memory, if such a provision was incorporated in the Indian government law, its legitimacy was challenged in the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court rejected it as unconstitutional and the then Indian government silently accepted it. In Bangladesh also, the promise of cancellation and amendment of Article 57 in the last decade has been promised many times by the responsible people of the government. After the amendment to the IT Act in 2006, the debate started again in 2013. Section 57 of the Act gives strong powers to the police and the protest against the law and order has become strong. This law is a cause of harassment instead of security and such instances are in front of us. Opposition suppression, marked as a barrier to independent media, was introduced in the 57th chapter. The Digital Security Act has nurtured our old anxiety and anxiety. On January 29, when the cabinet approved the draft of the Digital Security Act, it was found that the anxiety and anxiety over Article 57 had been restored or even more nurtured in other names.The freedom of speech must be kept open. The process of closing this door will not be fruitful, will not bring good fruit. Regardless of the objections of the country and abroad, including journalists, writers, researchers, lawyers, intellectuals, professionals, human rights organizations, why such a government has taken this step as democratic is surprising, simultaneous questions. After the bill was raised in the Parliament, the bill was sent to the parliamentary standing committee for examination. They finalized the bill with the opinion of the concerned people and submitted it to the parliament. In the meeting of the Standing Committee, representatives from the media and some more synthetic people offered some amendments. They said they had rejected the proposal to include several sections of the Information Technology Act, including controversial 57 cases, under the Digital Security Act. It was said that if the 21, 25, 28, 31, 32, and 43 of the bills are not canceled or amended, the independent journalism will be barred. According to the final recommendation of the parliamentary committee, those issues were mentioned, even by the magistrates. Some changes were also made in some sections. But most of the subpages remained unchanged even with 32 percent. Do not deny the requirements of the Digital Security Act The use of technology is also increasing due to the development of IT. It is also true that there are applications in different areas. Cyber ​​crime is increasing. But for all these controls,

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here