Use Of Social Media By Taliban And Legal Implications
I. Introduction
Since regaining control in 2021, the Taliban have increasingly used social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter/X, Telegram, WhatsApp, etc.) for:
Propaganda
Recruitment
Surveillance
Threats against opposition
Dissemination of religious and ideological content
Messaging to foreign audiences
This creates major legal and ethical challenges, especially considering:
The Taliban are not recognized as a lawful government by many states.
Their online activity often violates both international human rights law and pre-2021 Afghan criminal and cyber laws.
Social media companies have had mixed responses, at times removing Taliban-linked accounts, while others remain active.
II. Legal Frameworks Before and After 2021
A. Pre-2021 (Republic of Afghanistan)
Cyber Crime Law (2016) criminalized online propaganda, incitement to violence, and use of digital platforms for terrorism.
Penal Code (2017) Articles 238–239 criminalized the formation of groups aiming to overthrow the constitutional order.
Anti-Terror Law allowed prosecution of individuals or groups using media to support terrorism.
B. Post-2021 (Under Taliban Rule)
The Taliban enforce Sharia-based interpretations of law with limited codification.
They use social media not only for governance messaging but also for surveillance and suppression of dissent.
Little protection remains for online free expression.
III. Legal Implications of Taliban Social Media Use
Incitement to violence and hate speech
Online threats and harassment
Terrorism propaganda
Surveillance and privacy violations
International law violations (UN sanctions, etc.)
Cyber-control to suppress opposition
IV. Detailed Case Examples
1. Case: Taliban Telegram Channels Used to Doxx Female Journalists (2022)
Facts: Taliban-aligned Telegram channels published personal information and photos of women journalists, labeling them "enemies of Islam."
Legal Implication (Pre-2021 Law): Violates privacy, incitement to violence, and harassment laws.
Outcome: Several journalists went into hiding; no prosecutions.
Significance: Shows how social media was used to endanger individuals and silence dissent.
2. Case: Twitter Account of Taliban Spokesman @Zabihullah_M33 (2021–2023)
Facts: The Taliban spokesman used a verified Twitter account to issue official orders, threats, and religious decrees.
Legal Tension: Under Republic law, this could qualify as propaganda for a terrorist group.
Outcome: Twitter/X allowed the account for some time, citing "newsworthiness"; later removed under pressure.
Significance: Exposed global legal inconsistency on platform regulation for designated terrorist groups.
3. Case: Taliban Use of WhatsApp Groups to Coordinate Attacks (2019)
Facts: During battles in Ghazni and Kunduz, Taliban fighters used encrypted WhatsApp groups to plan and coordinate.
Legal Action: Afghan intelligence monitored and presented messages in court during terrorism prosecutions.
Outcome: Several individuals convicted for aiding enemy combatants.
Importance: Illustrates legal use of digital evidence in terrorism trials before Taliban takeover.
4. Case: Propaganda Videos on YouTube and Facebook (2020)
Facts: Taliban media teams posted edited videos of ambushes and “martyrdom” attacks on social platforms.
Legal Context: Under Cyber Crime Law, this constituted promoting terrorism and recruiting.
Enforcement: Afghan government pressured platforms to remove content; partial success.
Significance: Raised questions on international responsibility of tech companies.
5. Case: Arrest of University Student for Sharing Taliban Content (2020)
Facts: A student in Jalalabad was arrested for sharing Taliban videos on Facebook.
Charge: Disseminating terrorist propaganda under Cyber Law Article 24.
Defense: Claimed it was “out of curiosity” not endorsement.
Outcome: Convicted and sentenced to 18 months in prison.
Analysis: Pre-Taliban courts used social media activity as direct evidence of criminal intent.
6. Case: Taliban Surveillance of Activists via Facebook Posts (2021–2022)
Facts: Taliban monitored and arrested women’s rights activists based on their social media content.
Method: Posts were tracked using screenshots and tips from informants.
Legal Status: Under current Taliban rule, criticism of the regime is punishable; no formal legal protections exist.
Significance: Shows how social media can be turned into a surveillance tool.
7. Case: Use of Fake Taliban Accounts to Incite Violence (2022)
Facts: Accounts pretending to be Taliban officials spread false orders to attack minorities.
Outcome: Led to mob violence in Baghlan province.
Legal Gaps: Under both regimes, proving authorship and intent remains difficult in digital contexts.
Significance: Emphasized the dangers of unregulated online identity and fake news.
V. Summary Table: Taliban Social Media Use Cases
| Case No. | Nature of Social Media Use | Legal Implications | Outcome / Enforcement |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Doxxing of journalists via Telegram | Harassment, endangerment, privacy breach | No formal action |
| 2 | Use of official Twitter for threats/edicts | Propaganda, terrorist communications | Account removed |
| 3 | WhatsApp use for attack coordination | Evidence in terrorism trials | Pre-2021 convictions |
| 4 | Posting attack videos on Facebook/YouTube | Promotion of terrorism | Partial removal by platforms |
| 5 | Student sharing Taliban media | Propaganda dissemination | Conviction under cyber law |
| 6 | Surveillance of activists via Facebook | Suppression of dissent, privacy violation | Arrests without due process |
| 7 | Fake Taliban orders online | Incitement to violence | Violence occurred; no prosecution |
VI. Conclusion
The Taliban have weaponized social media as a tool of power, propaganda, and surveillance, blurring the line between communication and control.
Under pre-Taliban law, most of this activity would be criminal under anti-terrorism and cybercrime laws.
Post-2021, there is no legal safeguard for users; instead, online expression can be criminalized by the regime.
Global tech companies and international law remain inconsistent in their handling of Taliban-linked digital content.
VII. Recommendations for Reform
Reinstate and modernize Afghan cybercrime law under an inclusive government.
Engage international platforms to adopt uniform standards for content tied to extremist groups.
Protect digital rights and privacy of Afghan users, especially women, journalists, and activists.
Support digital literacy programs to help users detect disinformation and propaganda.
RELATED Blog
0 comments