Support Village Voice News With a Donation of Your Choice.
By Mark DaCosta- The Alliance for Change (AFC) has voiced strong opposition to the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) government’s proposed amendments to the Cybercrime Act, suggesting these changes could be a step towards criminalising defamation and stifling online expression. The AFC believes that the modifications could result in censorship and the curtailment of free speech, especially for those critical of the PPP government.
Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall said the amendments aimed to address use of the various social media platforms to “attack” private citizens.
Speaking on his weekly ‘Issues in the News’ programme, Nandlall warned: “Something has to be done about the use of the social media as a weapon against the citizens of this country…A government cannot stand idly by in the face of such onslaught on its citizens, that government will be failing in its responsibilities.”
It is Nandlall’s view information on social media is “completely unregulated” and “a regulatory framework must be installed and installed very quickly to arrest this situation and the penalties for violation of this regulatory framework must be condign.” According to the attorney general it “is an exceptional situation and an exceptional situation requires an exceptional response.”
Some view the attorney general’s statements and move to change the legislation as a threat to silence the relative freedom that exists on social media and efforts to hold the government accountable.
Ramjattan at his party’s recent press conference has urged the government to take a more measured approach in handling the spread of disinformation. He expressed concern that the amendments might infringe on Guyanese citizens’ rights to freedom of expression and conscience. “There must be a cautious approach taken in moving forward to avoid censorship and restrictions on legitimate content,” he advised.
The Member of Parliament and lawyer further argued that the current administration’s “democratic centralist” posture could potentially misuse the law to target critics and create a culture of self-censorship. He highlighted that discussions on substantive cybercrime provisions were still ongoing at the United Nations (UN) level, with a global convention expected in 2025.
It is the MP’s considered opinion “The haste at which the Attorney General appears to be pushing for this legislation, despite the absence of UN approval on the matter, is suspicious.”
In effort to make the law acceptable to society, Ramjattan has urged government to bring a green paper to Parliament and involve the Law Reform Commission in scrutinising the proposed amendments. He also recommended that any legislation should be examined by a special select committee to ensure a fair and thorough review.
Guyana’s Cybercrime Act, initially introduced in 2018, was designed to address crimes involving the use of the internet and technology. The Act covers offences such as illegal access to computer systems, data interference, system interference, and misuse of devices. These provisions were implemented to protect citizens from cyber-related crimes, including hacking, fraud, and the exploitation of vulnerable groups. However, recent attempts to amend the Act to include criminal sanctions for defamation have sparked a heated debate, with critics fearing that such changes could erode free speech and lead to government overreach.
For further reading of the UN’s Cybercrime Treaty refer:
https://news.un.org/en/interview/2024/02/1146772
