A new research report by the Centre for Governance Studies (CGS) and the Clooney Foundation for Justice has revealed how Bangladesh’s now-repealed Digital Security Act (DSA) became a central instrument for suppressing press freedom, criminalizing journalism, and intimidating reporters across the country.
The findings were unveiled on Monday at a publication ceremony and panel discussion at the Pan Pacific Sonargaon Hotel in Dhaka.
The study examined 222 cases filed against 396 journalists, coupled with interviews of 30 reporters who faced direct consequences under the law.
The evidence paints a disturbing picture–the DSA was routinely deployed to silence criticism, punish investigative reporting, and instill fear within newsrooms.
According to the report, politicians filed 73 of the 222 cases, using the law to pursue personal or political vendettas. Influential individuals also weaponized the DSA to retaliate against journalists.
In many cases, reporters were arrested without warrants, and the law’s provision allowing any individual to file a complaint — regardless of involvement — led to multiple cases being filed over a single news report.
One investigation detailed in the report highlighted how a journalist exposing police corruption was targeted not by the accused officer, but by a ruling party supporter.
During interrogation, the journalist said five to six officers questioned him aggressively, and alleged that he was subjected to electric shocks, with investigators probing whether he held an “anti-government” mindset.
The panel brought together Attorney General Md Asaduzzaman, Barrister Sara Hossain, Maneka Khanna of the Clooney Foundation for Justice, and Professor Sazzad Siddiqui of Dhaka University. The discussion was moderated by CGS Research Associate Roman Uddin.
Attorney General Asaduzzaman acknowledged the state’s long-standing reliance on restrictive laws.
“The state has kept many avenues open for the repression of journalists,” he said. “As the saying goes, the laws have as many sections as the stars in the sky.”
He noted that repealing the DSA is only one step, and a shift in state mentality is critical to safeguarding media freedom. He expressed hope that the next elected government would refrain from using any form of repressive legislation.
The report found that most DSA cases never moved to trial, and among those that did, the majority resulted in acquittals. Only one conviction was recorded in the entire dataset — a finding that underscores the weak legal basis on which most cases were filed.
Yet the prolonged legal battles inflicted profound damage–financial hardship, psychological stress, job loss, and a pervasive chilling effect on journalism.
‘The purpose was never trial — It was silence’
Barrister Sara Hossain stressed that DSA cases served as a deterrent rather than a path to justice.
“Cases against journalists were never filed with the intention of going to trial. Their purpose was to stop journalists from speaking and writing freely,” she said.
She welcomed recent legal reforms, including the incorporation of Supreme Court guidelines on warrantless arrest into amendments to the CrPC, but cautioned that enforcement remains weak.
Sara also criticized the Press Council’s ineffective performance and backed the report’s recommendation to form a Media Commission, while strengthening the Human Rights Commission and the Information Commission to resolve disputes outside the courts.
