Global Legislation Muzzling Freedom of Speech in the Guise of Cyber Security

The rapid advances in the field of information technology have created a wide cyberspace which is overarching the entire globe and consequently lead the governments to promulgate new legislation for cybersecurity, protect the data and privacy. The protection of data has also been linked by most of the countries with their national security and integrity which in return has surpassed many cases the privacy of individuals and their right to freedom of speech. The current study has reviewed several cybersecurity laws including global, regional and national legislations pertaining to cybersecurity. The study aims to find relationship between cybersecurity and freedom of speech in a cyberspace at global level, and explore as how the global legislation muzzle freedom of speech in the guise of cybersecurity. The objectives of the study have been attained by critical analysis of the existing international, regional and national laws on cybersecurity with a focus on international and regional cybersecurity regimes adopted by major global forums such as African Union, European Union, and the national regimes adopted by Big five countries as well as important countries of south Asia. The current study has found that the countries with political instability are more aggressive in curbing the freedom of speech in pretext of national security and integration. On the other hand, developed countries with political stability have shaped their legislation considering their political order with reference to their rival countries as well as threat perception against the cyberattacks. In both cases, the freedom of speech is affected negatively. This study finds an inverse correlation between cybersecurity laws and freedom of speech. It concludes that global cybersecurity legislation impedes the right to freedom of speech, contrary to intent of international human rights instruments. The freedom of expression and speech is mostly contained in the pretext of national security. In ethical context, the states justified their actions of limiting the freedom of speech through utilitarian approach. The law is abused by sates, law enforcement agencies and private companies for political victimization, their personal motives and commercial advantages respectively.