By Taha Kehar:

The brutal assassination of Governor Salman Taseer bore testament to the belief that even a mere statement of opinion on a piece of legislation could produce drastic consequences. While this draconian image of democracy in Pakistan serves as a brisk reality check, it also shows how periodic the opposition to this heinous law has been. Such lapses in the freedom of expression remain a subject of grave concern.

Nearly a year later, civil society is expressing satisfaction at the ‘change’ triggered by the new-fangled politicking by Imran Khan. There is a strong desire to forget the past and chalk out a strategy to achieve prosperity. But can a country buckled under pressure generated by decades of mismanagement seek to look ahead without confronting the past?

The struggle against financial corruption may streamline the political process and restore democratic values, but without the freedom of expression it will only produce a sham democracy.

Salman Taseer’s assessment of the blasphemy laws as ‘black law’ was an opinion expressed with the intention of prompting judicial review. It was a weapon to protect the interests of a woman who was being victimised on religious grounds and offered a shrewd commentary on the importance of minority rights in Pakistan. But unfortunately, there is no clemency for those who dare to speak out against oppression.

On January 4^th, 2010, Salman Taseer was assassinated for voicing his opinion. The crime was a clear indication of how the law of vengeance can supersede the writ of the state. Religion was used as a pretext for people to take the law into their own hands. Ironically so, the decision which was prodded by the desire to remedy the supposed assault on the integrity of Islam led to more offences related to religion. Aasia Bibi remains in custody, awaiting death for a crime she may or may not have committed.

It is equally distressing to note that an incident which, until a year ago, received immense global attention, seems to have taken a backseat to other issues. This has further exacerbated the situation as the blasphemy laws continue to be used as a tool for exploitation.

A plausible remedy to this problem would be to show a more consistent approach towards addressing issues resulting from the misuse of the law. Sporadic attempts to consider amendments or the possible abolishment of the blasphemy law will only render it a plaything for the liberal sections of society.

However, such consistency can only be achieved when the bastions of this movement for change understand that obstructing the freedom of expression is a form of corruption that will thwart the essence of democracy.

The online world has been all aflutter in recent weeks over the introduction of two pieces of legislation in Congress: the PROTECT IP Act in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House of Representatives. As PROTECT IP already passed in the Senate, last week the focus shifted to the hearings on SOPA and the fate that such legislation could have on the internet.

Both bills attempt to thwart online piracy and protect copyrighted intellectual property. However the way that Congress is trying to do this is by giving law enforcement and individual property owners the right to go after websites that might infringe on copyrighted materials and shutdown the website, prohibit other businesses from serving the sites, barring search results to the websites, and requiring service providers to block the websites. This may seem reasonable at the outset, but the results are far more complicated. The implications of such enforcement, and especially the individual right of action that SOPA allows, may mean that attempting to regulate the internet in this way threatens freedom of speech and information issues, places too high a burden on internet companies to comply, and fundamentally changes the way the internet will function within the United States and make it more on par with such beacons of freedom as China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia. It is these consequences that are leading many opponents to claim that SOPA will actually break the internet.

Last Thursday the House Judiciary Committee held a session to mark-up the proposed bill. The main focus was the 55 amendments proposed to the original bill, most of which try to soften the impact of the bill and find an acceptable middle ground between proponents of the bill, including the Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America, and the incredibly long list of internet-based companies and activists who are adamantly against the bill.

Throughout the hours of debating the amendments (all of which failed), netizens tracked and discussed the developments online. It is estimated that over 150,000 people from 150 different countries watched a portion of the hearings on Thursday through the KeepTheWebOpen.org webstream.  As the bill may determine how the internet functions in the US in the future, what better way of looking at the battle against the bill than seeing how it is being fought online?

The hearings are scheduled to resume on Wednesday, December 21. Follow the developments at KeepTheWebOpen.org.