The proposed Bangladesh Telecommunication (Amendment) Ordinance 2025 marks a fundamental shift in the country’s digital governance framework, significantly expanding state authority over communications, digital services, and online platforms. While the government argues the update reflects rapid technological adoption, rights groups warn the amendments extend far beyond traditional telecommunications regulation and risk undermining fundamental human rights.
The Ordinance dramatically broadens regulatory scope to include social media platforms, OTT services, cloud providers, data centres, e-commerce, digital payments, audiovisual media, and even AI services. By collapsing multiple distinct regulatory domains into a single, centralized framework under the Bangladesh Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (BTRC), the law concentrates unprecedented control over the digital ecosystem in the hands of the executive.
Civil society organizations argue this approach is particularly dangerous in Bangladesh’s current socio-political environment, where digital platforms play a vital role in journalism, civic engagement, and political dissent. Broad and vague definitions of “intermediaries” could enable sweeping content takedowns, service blocking, or throttling, including for content hosted outside Bangladesh, creating a chilling effect on free expression domestically and internationally.
The amendments also weaken the independence of the BTRC. Government control over appointments, removals, and internal operations significantly limits the regulator’s autonomy, making it unlikely to act independently on sensitive issues such as surveillance, network shutdowns, or politically motivated enforcement. Oversight mechanisms introduced in the Ordinance are dominated by government officials, excluding civil society and independent experts.
Licensing powers are further centralized, allowing ministerial committees to determine “nationally significant” licences based on undefined criteria such as public welfare or national security. Operating without a licence carries severe criminal penalties, raising concerns about arbitrary enforcement and political influence over market access.
Most alarmingly, the Ordinance substantially expands state surveillance powers. It authorizes the interception of communications, collection of internet traffic data, and installation of monitoring equipment with minimal safeguards and no requirement for judicial authorization. These provisions conflict with constitutional protections and Bangladesh’s obligations under international human rights law, particularly regarding privacy, proportionality, and due process.
Critically, the Ordinance fails to provide corresponding protections for users. It lacks explicit guarantees for privacy, data protection, transparency, access to remedies, or independent oversight, raising fears of a governance model that prioritizes state control over individual rights.
Rights groups are urging the government to revise the Ordinance through meaningful public consultation, align it with international human rights standards, and ensure that Bangladesh’s digital infrastructure serves the public interest rather than enabling unchecked state power.
