Law / Pakistan

Pakistan

5 of 9 named instruments researched to a stage, across three of the six areas of law we track: 5 in force. As of 6 September 2026.

  1. AI law 1
  2. Privacy law none researched
  3. Scraping law 3
  4. Cybersecurity law none researched
  5. Age gating law none researched
  6. News aggregation law 1

in forceenacted but not yet in forceproposedrepealed, withdrawn or blocked

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page.

AI law1 instrument, 1 in force

Research summary (214 words)

Pakistan has no AI-transparency, AI-risk-obligations, AI-training-data, AI-governance, or AI-sector-specific statute in force.

Section 19A of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016 (PECA) criminalises producing, distributing, or possessing material that visually depicts a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, a person appearing to be a minor engaged in such conduct, or a realistic image representing a minor engaged in such conduct, a formulation broad enough on its own terms to reach a realistic synthetic or AI-generated depiction of a minor and not only a photograph of a real child.

The Digital Nation Pakistan Act 2025 establishes a framework for government digital services and a national digital identity, binding government bodies rather than private developers, and is not catalogued here as an AI-specific instrument for that reason. The National Artificial Intelligence Policy 2025, approved by the Federal Cabinet, is a non-binding strategic framework rather than law and creates no enforceable duty.

A private-member Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Bill was introduced in the Senate in 2024 and, according to secondary reporting, remained before a Senate standing committee without having passed either chamber as of the most recent reporting found; the bill's own text has not been located in an official copy, so it is not catalogued as an instrument and its provisions are not described here.

AI prohibited practices

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016, child pornography offence

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016, s. 19A (Act No. XL of 2016)Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016

archived copyRead from a public archive copy, not the publisher directly. The publisher does not serve this page to automated readers, so a direct fetch was not an option here; how we access sources. Archived 2024. Publisher's page: https://www.na.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1470910659_707.pdf

In force. Binds public and private bodies.

What this law does

Section 19A(1) makes it an offence to intentionally produce, offer, make available, distribute, or transmit through an information system, or procure for oneself or another, or without lawful justification possess, material in an information system that visually depicts a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, a person appearing to be a minor engaged in such conduct, a realistic image representing a minor engaged in such conduct, or that discloses the identity of the minor.

Clause (c), covering a realistic image representing a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, is not limited to a photograph of a real child and on its own terms reaches a realistic computer-generated or AI-generated depiction. The offence carries imprisonment up to seven years or a fine up to Rs 5,000,000, or both. Subsection (2) lets an aggrieved person, or a minor's guardian, apply to the Authority for removal, destruction, or blocking of the material.

The retrieved text is the version as passed by the National Assembly, which does not itself carry the President's assent date or Gazette publication date.

What it requires

Scraping law3 instruments, 3 in force

Research summary (283 words)

Pakistan has no scraping-specific statute, so general law governs each dimension separately.

The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016 (PECA) criminalises unauthorized access, defined so that information available for access by the general public falls outside the offence, so a plain reading of section 3 does not reach the reading of a public, unauthenticated page; accessing an information system or data behind a login or other control, without authorization or in violation of the terms and conditions of the authorization, is unauthorized access and can also be unauthorized interference (s. 5) or, for a critical infrastructure system, a more heavily punished offence (s. 6).

No Pakistani court decision on the enforceability of a browsewrap or clickwrap terms-of-service against a scraper was located.

The Copyright Ordinance 1962 permits fair dealing only for a closed, enumerated list of purposes (research or private study, criticism or review, reporting current events in specified media, judicial proceedings, and a small number of others); it contains no text-and-data-mining exception, so training a model on scraped copyrighted text has no dedicated statutory ground and rests, at most, on whether it can be characterised as one of the enumerated purposes.

Copyright in a compilation of data extends only to the selection and arrangement, never to the underlying data or material itself, so Pakistan confers no sui generis database right over a scraped dataset. Pakistan has no comprehensive personal-data protection statute (see the privacy topic's finding for this jurisdiction), so scraping public personal data from a Pakistani website is not independently restricted by a data-protection law.

No Pakistani unfair-competition or misappropriation doctrine addressing scraping, and no statute or reported decision giving robots.txt legal weight or imposing an AI-training-specific duty, has been located.

Computer misuse

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016, unauthorized access and interference offences

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016, ss. 3, 5 and 6 (Act No. XL of 2016)Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016

archived copyRead from a public archive copy, not the publisher directly. The publisher does not serve this page to automated readers, so a direct fetch was not an option here; how we access sources. Archived 2024. Publisher's page: https://www.na.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1470910659_707.pdf

In force. Binds public and private bodies.

What this law does

Section 3 punishes whoever, with dishonest intention, gains unauthorized access to any information system or data, with imprisonment up to three months or a fine up to Rs 50,000, or both.

"Unauthorized access" is defined in section 2 as access to an information system or data that is not available for access by the general public, without authorization or in violation of the terms and conditions of the authorization, so information the general public may access is excluded from the offence on its own terms.

Section 5 separately punishes interfering with or damaging an information system or data without authorization, with imprisonment up to two years or a fine up to Rs 500,000, or both. Section 6 punishes the same conduct as section 3 where the information system or data is critical infrastructure, with a higher tier of imprisonment up to three years or a fine up to Rs 1,000,000, or both.

The retrieved text is the version as passed by the National Assembly, which does not itself carry the President's assent date or Gazette publication date.

What it requires

News aggregation law1 instrument, 1 in force

Research summary (127 words)

Pakistan has no press-publisher neighbouring right, no compelled platform-to-publisher bargaining code, and no dedicated text-and-data-mining opt-out mechanism; the Copyright Ordinance 1962 contains none of these regimes.

The Ordinance's only exception reaching news content is section 57(1)(b), fair dealing for reporting current events in a newspaper, magazine or similar periodical, by broadcast, in a cinematographic work, or by means of photographs, a closed list that does not in terms name a website or online publication, so whether it extends to an internet news aggregator's reproduction of headlines and snippets is an open question the text does not resolve.

No Pakistani hot-news or misappropriation doctrine, and no reported decision on whether hyperlinking to or framing a Pakistani news publisher's content is a communication to the public, has been located.

This page covers the instruments LexLint has researched to a stage. Instruments named in the corpus but not yet researched are counted in the head and are not listed here. Every entry carries its own primary source on its note page. This is a research index, not legal advice.