New rules extend government control to Pakistani journalists, producers and fixers working with international media, raising fears of a new form of preventive censorship
Pakistan has introduced new rules for foreign media that extend state control not only over international correspondents but also over Pakistani journalists, producers, fixers, and other collaborators working for foreign news organizations.
The new Guidelines for the Facilitation of the Foreign Media and Their Associates Working in Pakistan, introduced in August 2026, have been presented by the government as a way to make the work of international media clearer, more transparent, and better organized. Journalists and human rights organizations, however, see them as another restriction on the already shrinking space for independent journalism in Pakistan.
The most controversial aspect concerns freedom of movement. Foreign journalists were already subject to restrictions when working outside Islamabad, Karachi, and Lahore. The new rules extend this system more systematically to Pakistani citizens working for international media organizations. To travel elsewhere in the country for journalistic work, prior government authorization is required.
This is not merely a bureaucratic detail. Some of the most important areas for journalists are located outside the three main cities: Pakistan-administered Kashmir, Balochistan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, regions affected by protests, armed conflict, military operations, insurgencies, and allegations of human rights violations. Restricting journalists’ ability to reach these areas can also restrict what can be documented and reported.
The government’s External Publicity Wing plays a central role in this system. The office manages the registration and accreditation of both foreign journalists and Pakistani citizens working for international media organizations.
Restrictions on foreign correspondents were already particularly strict. Ordinary journalist visas generally cover Islamabad, Lahore, and Karachi. Traveling to other cities, making documentaries, or filming elsewhere may require a No Objection Certificate. Permission can therefore determine whether a journalist is able to reach the place where a story is unfolding.
The institutional role of the External Publicity Wing raises another important question. Its responsibilities include promoting a positive image of Pakistan and government policies abroad, monitoring foreign media coverage, responding to negative reporting, and managing the accreditation of international journalists.
The same institution is therefore involved both in shaping Pakistan’s international image and in regulating access for the foreign journalists responsible for reporting on the country.
The new regulations also arrive at a particularly sensitive moment.
Pakistan-administered Kashmir has recently experienced regional elections accompanied by protests, boycotts, and deadly clashes between demonstrators and security forces. International media organizations had reported on these events shortly before the introduction of the new rules.
Al Jazeera reported on protests and an election boycott in Muzaffarabad. Its English-language website subsequently became inaccessible to many Pakistani users without a VPN. Pakistan’s Ministry of Information strongly criticized the broadcaster’s coverage, describing it as “yellow journalism.”
The pressure on journalists covering the unrest has also taken a more direct and disturbing form.
On August 1, three Azad Kashmiri journalists — Razi Tahir, 18-year-old Muhammad Saif, and Raja Ikram — were reportedly detained in Islamabad while covering protests and voting boycotts connected to the elections in Azad Jammu and Kashmir.
According to eyewitness accounts, the three journalists were taken away by unidentified men in police uniforms and transferred to Kohsar and Shalimar police stations. Raja Ikram was later released, but Razi Tahir and Muhammad Saif remain unaccounted for.
Lawyers from the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan went to Kohsar Police Station seeking information about the two missing journalists. Police officials said that neither man was in their custody and that no First Information Report had been registered against them.
The International Federation of Journalists and the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists have condemned what they describe as enforced disappearances and called on the Pakistani authorities to immediately establish the whereabouts of Tahir and Saif, guarantee their safety, and investigate those responsible.
Razi Tahir had already faced action by the authorities only weeks earlier. In June 2026, he was arrested under Pakistan’s Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) over a social media post concerning a supposed meeting involving the imprisoned founder of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf. Press freedom and human rights organizations criticized the case as an attempt to intimidate Tahir because of his reporting.
The disappearance of Tahir and Saif gives the debate over Pakistan’s new media restrictions a much more concrete dimension. Restrictions on movement, accreditation requirements and government authorization do not exist in isolation: they are being introduced in an environment in which journalists covering politically sensitive events can face detention, intimidation or simply disappear.
The case is particularly significant because the three journalists were reporting on the very issue at the center of the current confrontation between the government and the media: protests and political unrest connected to Kashmir.
The BBC also reported from Pakistan-administered Kashmir and included testimony from protesters accusing Pakistani security forces of firing on unarmed demonstrators. Pakistani authorities rejected the allegations and journalists were subsequently told to leave the region.
The government insists that the new regulations do not constitute censorship. The Ministry of Information says the guidelines are intended to create a clear and transparent system for registration, accreditation, and assistance to journalists. Officials have also argued that the measures are not designed to prevent criticism of the government or legitimate investigative journalism.
International news organizations and press freedom advocates see the situation differently.
The BBC has expressed serious concern and called for the restrictions to be withdrawn. The Financial Times has stressed that journalists must be allowed to work freely and independently. Reuters has similarly maintained that journalists should be free to report wherever news happens.
Human Rights Watch has described the new controls as an alarming development in the continuing contraction of press freedom in Pakistan and has called for their immediate withdrawal.
The controversy is taking place against an already difficult background. Pakistan ranks 153rd out of 180 countries in the 2026 World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders, placing the country in the organization’s “very serious” category.
Pakistani journalists have faced arrests, intimidation, enforced disappearances, restrictions on movement, digital surveillance, legal proceedings, and pressure to censor their reporting.
One of the strongest voices against the new measures is Nasir Zaidi, a veteran Pakistani journalist and former secretary-general of the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists.
Zaidi’s own history makes his criticism particularly significant. He has lived through some of the most repressive periods in Pakistan’s modern history. During the military dictatorship of General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, Zaidi was publicly flogged for his involvement in the struggle for press freedom.
Speaking about the latest restrictions, Zaidi has argued that he had never witnessed comparable controls on international media even during periods of martial law.
For decades, he says, Pakistani governments have attempted to prevent certain stories from reaching the public, while international media have often played a crucial role in documenting political repression, opposition protests, state violence, and events that might otherwise have remained invisible.
His experience highlights the central issue raised by the new regulations: a government does not necessarily need to formally ban a story in order to prevent it from being reported.
If the state controls the authorization required for journalists to reach the place where a story is happening, it can indirectly control the reporting itself.
The experience of Farhan Gauhar Mallick illustrates another dimension of the pressure facing independent journalism in Pakistan.
Mallick is a Karachi-based journalist, former news director at Samaa TV, and founder of Raftar, an independent digital media platform producing reports, documentaries, interviews, and investigative journalism.
In November 2024, Pakistan’s Federal Investigation Agency summoned Mallick amid allegations concerning an “anti-state” campaign on social media.
On March 20, 2025, Mallick was arrested after appearing at the agency’s offices. According to authorities, the investigation concerned programs published by Raftar that were considered hostile to the country’s “security establishment.”
The day before his arrest, Federal Investigation Agency officials had arrived without prior notice at Raftar’s offices and summoned Mallick for questioning.
The Committee to Protect Journalists demanded his immediate and unconditional release, describing the case as part of a broader pattern of pressure against independent journalists in Pakistan. Human rights organizations also criticized the growing power of state agencies over journalists and called for the protection of freedom of expression.
Mallick’s case is not isolated.
Over the past several years, Pakistani journalists have faced arrests, criminal investigations, travel restrictions, intimidation, and surveillance. Some journalists have also been placed on the Exit Control List, preventing them from leaving the country.
The growing use of cybercrime legislation has created another instrument for controlling journalism and online expression. Journalists and human rights organizations have repeatedly warned that laws ostensibly designed to combat disinformation, cybercrime, or threats to national security can also be used against critical reporting.
Against this background, the new Foreign Media Facilitation Guidelines represent more than an administrative change.
Their most important feature is the extension of state control to Pakistani citizens working for international media organizations.
Local reporters, producers, translators, and fixers are essential to international journalism. They understand the territory, identify sources, translate testimony, provide cultural and political context, and allow foreign correspondents to reach communities far from the major cities.
Making their movements dependent on government authorization means intervening directly in the infrastructure that allows international journalism to report on Pakistan.
There is also an unavoidable paradox in the official name of the new rules: Guidelines for the Facilitation of the Foreign Media.
Guidelines designed to “facilitate” journalism may ultimately make journalism more difficult.
The crucial question will now be how the regulations are applied.
If authorization is granted quickly, consistently, and without discrimination, the government will be able to argue that the system is genuinely administrative.
But if permissions are delayed or denied precisely when journalists attempt to reach protests, conflict zones, political demonstrations, or places where human rights violations are being reported, the new rules could become an extremely effective form of preventive censorship.
No newspaper needs to be formally closed.
No article needs to be officially banned.
Sometimes it is enough to prevent the journalist from reaching the place where the story is happening.
