● Enforcement left to the regulator, composed solely of
executive-appointed individuals.
● Enables takedown of online content critical of the
government.
● Enacted without considering the Sri Lanka Code of Practice
for Online Safety and Responsible Content developed by
industry association.
Thematic Overlaps
Each country examined in this report
walks a tightrope, where pushing back
against the state carries significant
risks, and civil society opposition
remains muted. Funding from
international donors is often attached to
objectives far removed from the lived
realities of local communities.
Challenges of adopting global
governance frameworks are a common
denominator across the region,
particularly around the cost
management of compliance with
international regulations, the dichotomy
between consumer-oriented versus
rights-oriented laws, and the insistence
of states to adopt the latest and
greatest tech policy when political
institutions are ill-equipped to support
them, remains persistent. Moreover,
domestic tech policies are heavily
influenced by occidental standards,
resulting in a form of elite capture where
the priorities of the Global North dictate
the regulatory direction of South Asia.
This dynamic enables the exploitation of
existing discriminatory fault lines in
ways not always apparent in the original
legal frameworks. For instance,
fundamental rights such as freedom of
expression—often assumed in the
Global North—remain underdeveloped in
many South Asian countries.
Consequently, imposing digital
governance models without first
addressing such offline structural issues
risks deepening existing power
imbalances.
Against this backdrop, five key themes
emerge as prevalent challenges across
South Asian countries. Based on a
survey of twelve digital rights
organizations representing the in-focus
countries, a visual assessment maps
the positioning of each country along
two axes: institutional maturity (i.e., the
extent to which each issue is embedded
within legal, political, and economic
frameworks), and structural resilience
(i.e., the capacity of civil society and the
public to resist and advocate against
these challenges).
19