Balancing State Security and Freedom of Expression: A Case Study of Bangladesh's Media Landscape

Abstract

This paper provides a rigorous socio-legal critique of the tension between national security imperatives and freedom of expression in Bangladesh, with a specific focus on the Digital Security Act (DSA) 2018. While Article 39 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of the press, the study argues that the broad, ambiguous language of the DSA specifically Sections 21, 25, 29, and 31 has effectively weaponized the law against journalists, activists, and human rights defenders. Through an analysis of case studies, including the custodial death of writer Mushtaq Ahmed and the detention of photojournalist Shafiqul Islam Kajol, the research quantifies a "chilling effect" characterized by widespread self-censorship and the criminalization of dissent. The study further explores the role of non-state actors, including religious factions and corporate conglomerates, whose influence creates a "dual pressure" on editorial independence. Findings from the Centre for Governance Studies (CGS) reveal that approximately 60% of DSA cases are initiated by law enforcement or ruling party affiliates, suggesting that the Act functions more as a tool for political intimidation than as a framework for cyber-safety. The paper posits that the current legal landscape deviates from international human rights standards, specifically the ICCPR, by bypassing judicial oversight and enabling warrantless arrests based on mere suspicion. To restore democratic integrity, the study recommends a comprehensive policy overhaul: the decriminalization of defamation, the precise definition of vague legal terms, and the establishment of independent regulatory bodies to safeguard the "watchdog" role of the media.