Cintia A. , Lebledparle.com
The decision, which took effect since Monday, has sparked criticism from opposition politicians and media experts who argue that it is a violation of human rights and an attack on free speech. Police Minister Peter Tsiamalili Jr in support of the move stated that the government’s intention was not to suppress freedom of expression but to protect citizens from harmful content.
Inasmuch as the government’s intent might be for the country’s good, Facebook is the most popular social media platform in PNG, with an estimated 1.3 million users and it is reported that many small businesses rely on the platform for sales and customer engagement, making the ban a significant economic setback for most entrepreneurs.
Neville Choi, president of Papua New Guinea’s Media Council, criticized the ban describing it as an abuse of human rights. He also pointed out that at least two government agencies overseeing communication and technology were unaware of the government’s plans, despite claims by the police that the ban was implemented in collaboration with them. Aside Neville Choi condemning this ban, opposition MP Allan Bird took to Facebook to express his concerns, calling the move “tyrannical.” and suggesting that blocking Facebook was only “step one” in a larger government agenda not yet known.
According to reports, this decision comes just months after the PNG government passed new counter-terrorism laws, which grant authorities greater power to monitor and restrict online communications. This is also not the first time PNG has taken action against Facebook. In 2018, the country imposed a one-month ban on the platform while authorities attempted to eliminate fake profiles.
Despite this ban, many citizens have found ways to go past the restriction by using Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) to access Facebook. As the debate over the ban continues, concerns grow over the potential for further restrictions on digital rights in Papua New Guinea. With social media playing a big role in business, communication, and governance, many fear that such measures could lead to long-term consequences for democracy and freedom of speech in the country.
