2 Jul 2025 | Iran, Middle East and North Africa, News and features, Newsletters
As I wrote the newsletter last week we were closely following events in Iran but didn’t have a full picture in terms of free speech ramifications, in part because of censorship itself – internet blackouts and media bans meant that information was slow to leave the country. One week on, it’s different. Many alarming stories have emerged.
The conflict between Israel and Iran was of course marked from the start by free speech violations – early on there was the bombing of Iranian state television. Then later there were strikes on Tehran’s Evin Prison. While these acts may have been intended as symbolic blows against key institutions of Iranian repression, the consequences were grimly real: media workers killed, political prisoners endangered. And in between? Lots of repression.
At Index, some developments were personal, including when our 2023 Arts Award winner – the rapper Toomaj Salehi – disappeared for three days. Beyond our immediate network, according to the Centre for Human Rights in Iran, more than 700 citizens have been arrested in the past 12 days, some for alleged “espionage” or “collaboration” with Israel. There have also been six executions on espionage charges carried out, with additional death sentences expected.
The Supreme Council of National Security announced that any action deemed supportive of Israel would be met with the most severe penalty: death. The scope was broad, ranging from “legitimising the Zionist regime” to “spreading false information” or “sowing division”.
As mentioned above, Iran also began restricting internet access before shutting down access altogether. Officials claimed the blackout was necessary to disrupt Israeli drone operations allegedly controlled through local SIM-based networks. The result: ordinary Iranians were cut off from vital news. International journalists from outfits like Deutsche Welle (DW) were banned from reporting inside Iran. The family of a UK-based journalist with Iran International TV was even detained in Tehran, in an attempt to force her resignation. Her father called her under duress, parroting instructions from security agents: “I’ve told you a thousand times to resign. What other consequences do you expect?”
Yet amid the bleakness, there have been a few positive instances. Iranian state media aired a patriotic song by Moein, a pop icon long exiled in Los Angeles. Some billboards replaced religious slogans with pre-Islamic imagery, such as the mythical figure Arash the Archer. There has also been an unexpected digital reprieve: on Wednesday, following the agreement of an Israel-Iran ceasefire deal brokered by the US administration the day before, Iranians reported unfiltered access to Instagram and WhatsApp for the first time in two years.
Given everything else it feels unlikely that this openness will last. This week’s proposals by Iran’s judiciary officials to expand espionage laws and increase the powers of Iran’s sprawling security apparatus imply as much, too. So while the world’s eyes might have moved away from Iran, our gaze is still there – documenting the free speech violations and campaigning for their end.
20 Jun 2025 | Cambodia, India, Iran, Israel, News and features, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, United Kingdom
In the age of online information, it can feel harder than ever to stay informed. As we get bombarded with news from all angles, important stories can easily pass us by. To help you cut through the noise, every Friday Index publishes a weekly news roundup of some of the key stories covering censorship and free expression. This week, we look at how Israel has targeted Iranian media in bombing strikes, and the state execution of a Saudi journalist.
Bombed live on broadcast: Israel strikes Iranian state media
In the early hours of Friday 13 June, Israel launched strikes against Iran which has since escalated into a larger conflict, with major population centres such as Tehran and Tel Aviv facing missile attacks. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims the initial attack, dubbed Operation Rising Lion, was pre-emptive to prevent Iran from producing a nuclear weapon which Israel believed was imminent – a claim that is not backed up by US intelligence. Beyond nuclear targets, Israeli missiles have targeted another facet of the Iranian state: the media.
On 16 June, the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting’s (IRIB) TV channel was broadcasting live news coverage of the conflict when an explosion rocked the studio, forcing the presenter to flee and the broadcast to cut to pre-recorded bulletins. Israel had bombed the studio live on air in a direct attack on Iranian media. Israeli defence minister Israel Katz described the attack as a strike on the “propaganda and incitement broadcasting authority of the Iranian regime“, while an Israeli military spokesperson alleged that IRIB was aiding the Iranian military “under the cover of civilian assets and infrastructure“. Iranian officials described the attack as a war crime, while the head of IRIB Peyman Jebelli stated that the studio was damaged, but vowed that broadcasting would return. Local media reported that three members of staff were killed in the attack, including a senior news editor.
“High treason” or Twitter?: Saudi journalist executed after social media posts
On 14 June 2025, the Saudi Interior Ministry announced on X that it had carried out the death penalty on Saudi journalist Turki al-Jasser, who stood accused of high treason and terrorism charges, in the first high-profile killing of a Saudi journalist since Jamal Khashoggi. But campaigners close to the case believe that the true reason for al-Jasser’s arrest and execution in 2018 was his posts made on X (then called Twitter).
Al-Jasser reportedly had two accounts: one under his real name, and a second, anonymous account that was critical of the Saudi government, accusing the Saudi royal family of corruption. The Saudi government is thought to have identified al-Jasser as someone involved with attempting to topple the government because of his posts; Saudi Arabia allegedly infiltrated Twitter’s databases to access information about anonymous users in 2014 and 2015, and could have identified Al-Jasser using a similar method. It has been reported that Al-Jasser, who founded the news website Al-Mashhad Al-Saudi (The Saudi Scene), was tortured during his seven-year detention.
Changing views: Reforms to freedom of expression on UK campuses
The university campus is often considered a battleground for free speech, with conflicting ideals constantly in debate and student protests making national news. Universities are often caught between supporting staff or students, and are frequently criticised for giving or denying controversial speakers a platform.
Following some high-profile incidents, universities have asked for clarity. Kathleen Stock, a philosophy professor at the University of Sussex, resigned in 2021 following protests on campus regarding her gender-critical views, for example. The Office for Students (OfS) fined the university £585,000 for the poor handling of her case and failing to uphold free speech.
A set of new OfS guidelines are intended to provide clear advice on what is permitted and what is not. In the guidelines, the OfS has ruled that universities in England will no longer be able to enforce blanket bans on student protests. This follows a wave of pro-Palestine student protests, with encampments appearing on university grounds across the country. Some universities have looked to prohibit such demonstrations, as Cambridge University did when a court ruled to block any further Israel-Palestine protests until the end of July.
The OfS guidelines also address the protection of viewpoints by staff and students that some may find offensive. Arif Ahmed, director for freedom of speech and academic freedom at OfS, stated that students “have to accept that other people will have views that you find uncomfortable” when attending university. The guidelines come into effect in UK universities on 1 August.
No more soap operas: Cambodia bans Thai TV in border dispute
Since a clash at a disputed border area between Cambodia and Thailand claimed the life of a Cambodian soldier on 28 May, the two southeast Asian nations have seen tensions escalate. Each side blamed the other for the skirmish, which has resulted in an increased armed presence at the border and the introduction of retaliatory measures by both governments. With neither side looking to back down, the Cambodian government has taken a further step to sever ties with its neighbour by banning Thai TV and movies from being shown in Cambodia.
The ban also includes a boycott of any Thai internet links; a move that Cambodia’s minister of post and telecommunication Chea Vandeth claimed would cost Thailand hundreds of millions of dollars. Every cinema in the country has been informed that import and screening of Thai films is strictly prohibited as of 13 June, and Thai TV broadcasts – such as Thai soap operas, which are especially popular in Cambodia – must be replaced with Chinese, Korean or Cambodian dramas. Tensions continue to rise, and Cambodia instituted a ban on Thai fruit imports on Tuesday.
Citizen journalism under fire: Government of Jammu and Kashmir has YouTubers and online content creators in their sights
The government of Jammu and Kashmir has issued an order targeting those it deems to be “impersonating journalists”, including content creators on YouTube, Facebook and Instagram. The order restricts speech vaguely defined as “provocative” or “false” content, and content creators reporting on political affairs in the region could be classified as “impersonating a journalist”. The order comes with significant legal threats such as fines, imprisonment and the confiscation of electronic devices, allowing for anyone deemed to be “disrupting public order” to face consequences.
Threats to free speech in Jammu and Kashmir have been prevalent since a deadly terrorist attack in Indian-controlled Kashmir in April claimed 26 lives. Journalist Rakesh Sharma was physically assaulted while covering a protest in Jammu and Kashmir, and following the terrorist attack, the Indian government implemented widespread digital censorship on Pakistani and Muslim content on social media. With the new order, it will be even harder for residents of Jammu and Kashmir to stay informed.
14 May 2025 | Asia and Pacific, Burma, News and features, Volume 54.01 Spring 2025
This article first appeared in Volume 54, Issue 1 of our print edition of Index on Censorship, titled The forgotten patients: Lost voices in the global healthcare system, published on 11 April 2025. Read more about the issue here.
Four years ago, the military junta in Myanmar overthrew the government in a coup following a national election. While the liberal democratic National League for Democracy won by a landslide, the military alleged widespread fraud, justifying its seizure of power.
Tens of thousands of people took to the streets for mass protests, and the military responded with brutal violence.
Civil defence forces were formed in a huge movement of resistance, including by ethnic minority rebel groups that have fought with the government for decades. Violence has escalated, and the coup continues to claim the lives of thousands of civilians (a conservative estimate) and displace millions more.
In post-coup Myanmar, the internet has become a weapon and the military government has carried out hundreds of internet shutdowns and heavily censored social media in an effort to curb insurgency.
Before 2021, several peace organisations operated in the country, including those advocating for a gender-inclusive process to end the conflict between the government and ethnic armed groups. These include the Alliance for Gender Inclusion in the Peace Process (AGIPP), the Mon Women’s Network, and the Gender Equality Network.
But the websites for these organisations are now broken or no longer exist. The women who run them have had to shift their attention towards a more urgent fight to stop the widespread sexual and gendered violence being committed by the current regime while attempting to operate within a “digital dictatorship”, as labelled by UN human rights experts. Many of these women have fled their home country.
Unable to return to Myanmar, they have built remote digital activism movements, such as the Sisters2Sisters campaign – an online organisation working to build global solidarity for Myanmar’s women and orchestrate online campaigns from outside the country. This includes exposing mass sexual violence, often against ethnic minority women and girls, extrajudicial killings of young people, and violence towards other marginalised communities, such as LGBTQ+ groups.
Among the millions of young people who have left the country are Flora and Elle (not their real names), who fled from Myanmar to neighbouring Thailand in 2023. Both worked in gender and youth-focused resistance movements and now do advocacy work from abroad. In order to work within the confines of Myanmar’s censorship and Thailand’s amenability to the junta, they take refuge in pseudonyms, discreet meeting rooms and virtual private networks (VPNs). I spoke to them both over a joint call, secured via VPN.
Elle, from Sagaing Region, told Index: “Because of the fighting between the resistance forces and the military, the military shuts down the internet intentionally because they don’t want [news of] the killings or massacre to spread online.”
I first met Elle in Thailand at a meeting about gender-focused advocacy in Myanmar. I asked her about the countless organisations whose websites have been deleted or have stopped posting online.
“[This] is one of the major problems with organisations working on women’s rights [and human rights],” she said. “When we publish or announce cases, we have to be aware of the sensitivities of the data and [the danger of] publishing from official websites and social media.
“The Myanmar military has tracked down these posts. They don’t target every post but they have a team that specifically looks at data and news from [these] organisations – and if it’s within their reach, the [organising] in that township will be shut down.”
Flora comes from Kayin State, a district largely populated by Kayin people (also known as Karen people) – an ethnic minority group that has become a hub for the resistance movement and has been targeted by the military since 2021. She herself is Kayin.
“As active [resistance organisation] members, we face a lot of difficulties and challenges,” she said. “Because of the internet shutdowns, we don’t have internet access, and … the military banned VPNs.”
In January this year, the junta passed the Cybersecurity Law which, it claims, aims to “protect and safeguard the sovereignty and stability of the nation from being harmed by cyberthreats, cyberattacks or cyber misuse through the application of electronic technologies”.
Within the wide-reaching law is an official ban on unauthorised use of VPNs, with a prison sentence of up to six months and a fine if someone is found with one on their device.
“This impacts every organisation that has supported democracy,” Flora explained. “If we use a VPN and they find it on our phones, they will arrest and prosecute us.”
Digital access has been a crucial part of the resistance movement, and organisers and protesters have been targeted for digital communications since the February 2021 coup, leading to arrests and shutdowns.
“Look at history,” said Flora. “In 1988, there was no internet and information was locked down. We didn’t know what really happened on the ground so it was easy for the government to control information.”
That was the year of the 8888 Revolution, which saw youth-led resistance to the government and nationwide protests in support of democracy and human rights. A violent response saw more than 3,000 people killed (with particular cruelty inflicted on ethnic minorities such as the Kayin) and hundreds of thousands displaced. The similarities between today and 1988 show how Myanmar has both a turbulent past and a longstanding legacy of community action.
But Flora said there was a difference between then and now. “Since the beginning, the military has tried to control the internet but the young generations know the effects of technology,” she said. “We have VPNs and we have strategies to continue our activities. Youth groups spread knowledge about democracy even with the military trying to cut the internet.”
Pro-democracy groups organise largely through encrypted online platforms such as Signal, using VPNs and burner phones. They gain information on the crimes of the junta against civilians, which includes mass rape and forcing women to become domestic labourers when their husbands have been killed or sent to war.
Platforms such as Sisters2Sisters also continue to publish these crimes and call for the international community to take action.
There is another unexpected way that Myanmar’s citizens can continue to communicate freely with the outside world – by using Starlink, the global satellite internet system owned by Elon Musk’s SpaceX.
The system is not licensed in Myanmar, but illegal services still operate and Elle and Flora use it to talk to their families back home.
“It’s the only way, so there are secret shops for locals – our families go to these shops to call us,” said Elle.
In Thailand, safe spaces in Bangkok offer hubs for exiled female activists to reconvene, holding inter-ethnic dialogues and combining the efforts of groups that were previously divided on lines of ethnicity and religion. These conversations, along with communication with groups within Myanmar, have helped to consolidate organising efforts into mass insurgencies of rebel fighters who are continuing to gain ground in Myanmar’s jungles.
Digital organising is key to gaining international awareness, and Elle has been working hard to get multilateral bodies to recognise and act on the atrocities.
“No matter how much we are trying to support the rights of women and LGBTQ+ communities, we need support from the international community,” she said. Even though the UN has a special mission to Myanmar, Western governments have shown relatively little outrage at the ongoing abuses, and there has been very little military aid for resistance forces.
For campaigners such as Flora and Elle, their activism represents more than a political stance – it’s a deeply personal pursuit, with their livelihoods and the safety of their families hinging on it. Their work is fuelled by the hope that by exposing the junta’s crimes and continuing to grow insurgency movements, it will pressure global leaders to act and the junta’s rule will be shortened.
But even though they are no longer in the country, the new Cybersecurity Law shows that they are increasingly under threat.
“We will be prosecuted because we are working on human rights,” said Flora. “If [you] share information against the military, you are criminalised. I am so worried about this. Even if we are outside Myanmar, the law applies to every Myanmar citizen. I am really worried about our activities because access to information is so important.”
When asked if they could safely return to Myanmar to visit their families, both of them give painful laughs. “In Myanmar, everyone has a list of criminal charges. If they want to arrest you, they will always have a reason to do so,” said Elle.
Within the sanctuary of (relative) freedom in Thailand, Flora and Elle are continuing their movement online.
“We need to know what is happening in Myanmar,” said Elle. “Right now, every youth and woman is living in fear because [the junta] restricted the internet … to cover [up] all the injustices.”
SUBSCRIBE[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]