Press Restrictions: Conflict with Freedom of Expression and Public Awareness

Introduction

The press and media play a foundational role in every society by shaping public awareness, enabling social oversight, and strengthening the pillars of democracy. Freedom of expression—one of the most essential human rights—finds its clearest expression through the free operation of the press. In societies where media can function without censorship or external pressure, citizens enjoy the right to access information, criticize government, and become aware of social realities.

In post-republic Afghanistan, however, sweeping restrictions have been imposed on media and the press. These measures not only conflict with the principles of freedom of expression but also constitute a serious obstacle to the intellectual and social development of society. Do such restrictions on the press and freedom of expression contradict both international human rights standards and the principles of Islamic Sharia?

What is Freedom of the Press?

Freedom of the press means the legal right of media outlets and individuals to publish information and opinions freely, without fear of state punishment or interference. This freedom is indispensable for the vitality of any society—particularly democratic ones—because it enables citizens to exercise their right to express views and hear diverse opinions on matters of collective importance.

Importance of Press Freedom in Democratic Systems

In democratic systems, the press functions as the “watchful eye of the nation.” Its core duties include reflecting reality, holding power to account, and disseminating knowledge to the public. Theoretically, press freedom is one of the primary indicators of democracy and the rule of law. In its absence, transparency vanishes, corruption flourishes, and the gap between rulers and the ruled widens. Healthy, independent media promote government accountability and strengthen public trust through accurate information.

Current Restrictions on the Press in Afghanistan

Article 34 of the 2004 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan explicitly states: “Freedom of expression is inviolable. Every Afghan has the right to express thoughts through speech, writing, illustration, or other means, in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.” This provision not only guarantees individual freedom of expression but implicitly protects media freedom as well.

By contrast, Article 17 of the Law on Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Voice (PVPV) assigns the muhtasib the duty to compel media officials to observe the following during publication:

1. Content must not contradict Sharia or religion.
2. Content must not contain humiliation or insult to Muslims.
3. Content must not include images of living beings.

By granting the ruling authority the power to define what constitutes opposition to Sharia, insult to Muslims, or prohibited imagery, these vague and subjective criteria severely restrict the scope of freedom of expression and place media under direct state control.

Since the political change in 2021, Afghanistan’s media landscape has undergone dramatic transformation. Dozens of private outlets and information institutions have closed due to political pressure, security threats, and financial difficulties. Journalists and writers face censorship, self-censorship, and, in many cases, direct threats. Publishing critical content about the ruling structure or sensitive social issues can result in arrest, intimidation, or the shutdown of media organizations.

New regulations issued by the Emirate have further imposed severe limits on content, interviews, and even online media activities. As a result, many journalists have left the country, and Afghanistan’s once-diverse and dynamic media environment has lost much of its vibrancy. In this climate, the press has become largely unable to fulfill its informative role, while public trust in the honesty and independence of media has been severely damaged. The silencing of the press is, in effect, the silencing of collective awareness, reason, and voice.

Freedom of expression and access to information are also recognized as fundamental human rights under international law. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Consequences of Press Restrictions

Restrictions on the press produce far-reaching effects beyond the media sector. First, they cause intellectual and cultural stagnation: without free media, art, literature, and social critique are also constrained, as these fields depend directly on freedom of expression. Second, society loses the ability to participate knowledgeably in political and social affairs, as citizens cannot make informed decisions without access to accurate information. Third, the closure of legitimate channels for awareness and criticism creates fertile ground for extremism, one-sided propaganda, and radical ideologies. In place of rational discourse, society is pushed toward intellectual violence and fanaticism—a particularly dangerous outcome for a country like Afghanistan that has long suffered from protracted conflict and identity crises.

Conclusion

Freedom of the press is not merely an individual right; it is the foundation of collective awareness and the bedrock of a dynamic society. The current restrictions on the press in Afghanistan amount to the denial of the people’s right to know and to think. While the Constitution of the former Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and international human rights instruments strongly affirm freedom of expression and media, the present reality stands in clear contradiction to these principles.

If Afghanistan is to build an aware, questioning, and progressive society, press freedom must be restored as an indisputable citizen right. A free press is not the enemy of government; it is its partner in reform, transparency, and progress. The silencing of media is the silencing of collective reason—and no society can grow in silence.

Footnote: [1] Graduates of the Legal Education Program, FTD-N.