Cyber Harassment, Defamation, And Online Crime Prosecutions
Introduction: Cyber Harassment, Defamation, and Online Crime
With the rise of the internet, social media, and digital communication, cybercrimes have become increasingly prevalent. In Pakistan, these crimes are primarily dealt with under:
Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), 2016 – Sections 21, 22, 23, 24, etc.
Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), 1860 – sections related to defamation (e.g., 499, 500), criminal intimidation, and insult.
Cybercrimes can include:
Cyber harassment – stalking, intimidation, or threats online.
Cyber defamation – spreading false information damaging a person’s reputation.
Online financial fraud, hacking, identity theft, and obscene content.
1. Cyber Harassment Case – Qandeel Baloch Murder (2016)
Background:
Qandeel Baloch, a social media influencer, faced intense online harassment due to her posts and lifestyle. While her murder by her brother was a domestic crime, the online harassment preceding it highlighted the lack of mechanisms to protect women online.
Legal Basis:
PECA 2016: Section 21 (Cyber Stalking) and Section 22 (Cyber Harassment)
Outcome:
The case drew national attention and triggered discussions on online harassment leading to offline violence.
Legal reforms emphasized digital harassment as a punishable offense.
Analysis:
Significance: Highlighted the need for effective cyber harassment laws.
Limitations: No legal action against online trolls at the time; the law was later strengthened under PECA.
2. Defamation Case – Twitter Defamation Case Against Fawad Chaudhry (2020)
Background:
A complaint was filed against Fawad Chaudhry, Federal Minister, for allegedly defaming another public figure on Twitter.
Legal Basis:
PECA Section 20: Publication of defamatory material online
PPC Sections 499 & 500: Traditional criminal defamation
Outcome:
Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) Cybercrime Wing registered the case.
Fawad Chaudhry apologized publicly, and the case was settled outside court.
Analysis:
Effectiveness: PECA enabled FIA intervention for online defamation, showing that high-profile individuals can be held accountable.
Challenges: Settlement outside court shows limitations in enforcing strict punitive action.
3. Online Blackmail Case – Cyber Stalking and Extortion (2018)
Background:
A woman in Lahore was blackmailed online with personal photos; the accused demanded money in exchange for not sharing the images publicly.
Legal Basis:
PECA Section 21 (Cyber Stalking)
PECA Section 22 (Cyber Harassment)
PPC Sections 384 (Extortion)
Outcome:
The FIA Cybercrime Wing arrested the suspect within days.
The court sentenced him to three years imprisonment and a fine, setting an example.
Analysis:
Effectiveness: Demonstrated PECA’s strength in addressing rapid-response cybercrime prosecutions.
Limitation: Delays in court proceedings still occur in some districts.
4. Hate Speech / Religious Defamation Online – Junaid Jamshed Case (2016)
Background:
Social media posts targeted religious sentiments and accused individuals falsely of blasphemy. A complaint was filed against anonymous users posting offensive material online.
Legal Basis:
PECA Section 11 (Harm to Reputation)
PPC Section 295-C (Blasphemy, if applicable online)
Outcome:
FIA traced and arrested the offenders using IP tracking.
The court imposed fines and prison sentences, emphasizing that religious defamation online is punishable.
Analysis:
Significance: Case underlined PECA’s capacity to trace anonymous online actors.
Challenge: Enforcement is resource-intensive and requires technical expertise.
5. Online Banking Fraud / Cybercrime Case – Karachi Banking Scam (2019)
Background:
A gang used online banking portals and phishing emails to steal PKR 50 million from multiple accounts. Victims reported it to FIA Cybercrime Wing.
Legal Basis:
PECA Section 7: Unauthorized access to information systems
PECA Section 9: Electronic fraud
Outcome:
FIA traced the suspects, recovered a portion of funds, and the court sentenced six accused to 5-7 years imprisonment.
Analysis:
Effectiveness: Shows PECA’s ability to handle financial cybercrimes efficiently.
Limitation: Recovery of stolen funds is often partial; prosecution can be lengthy.
6. Social Media Fake Account / Impersonation Case (2021)
Background:
A politician’s Facebook account was impersonated, and false posts were made that defamed him publicly.
Legal Basis:
PECA Section 11 (Harm to Reputation / Impersonation)
PPC Section 499-500 (Defamation)
Outcome:
FIA successfully traced IP and arrested the impersonator.
The accused was convicted and fined, and the fake account was removed.
Analysis:
Demonstrates technical capability of cybercrime units.
Highlights the importance of evidence preservation and digital forensics.
Overall Evaluation
| Factor | Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Framework | PECA provides specific provisions for harassment, defamation, fraud | Some sections are vague; misuse possible |
| Prosecution Efficiency | FIA Cybercrime Wing actively investigates cases | Courts sometimes slow due to backlog |
| High-Profile Cases | PECA used effectively against politicians, public figures | Settlements outside court limit deterrence |
| Digital Evidence | IP tracking, social media evidence admissible | Requires technical expertise; risk of tampering |
| Public Awareness | Awareness campaigns on cyber harassment increasing | Victims often unaware of rights or reluctant to file complaints |
Conclusion
PECA 2016 has provided Pakistan with a robust legal tool to prosecute cyber harassment, defamation, online fraud, and impersonation.
FIA Cybercrime Wing has successfully handled multiple high-profile cases, including social media defamation and banking scams.
Challenges remain: slow court proceedings, difficulty in recovering damages, and lack of public awareness.
Key takeaway: While online crime prosecution is improving, technical, legal, and societal measures must continue evolving to ensure swift and effective justice in the digital age.
RELATED Blog
0 comments