Government and Parliament Propose Dozens of Plans, Bills, and Regulations Against Freedom of Expression

The “Regulation of Cyberspace” is the newest plan proposed by members of the Iranian parliament to restrict free access to the internet. 

While details of the bill, which was submitted on August 2nd, 2025, have not been officially released, “Filterwatch” has obtained information revealing its focus on “setting levels of access,” “criminalization,” and “determining punishments” for certain users. This idea of “controlling access” is essentially a “tiered internet” system — where people’s access to websites and services is limited based on government-assigned categories — a policy insisted upon by many members of parliament.

This report’s key findings are as follows:

• An Avalanche of New Laws:  Authorities are churning out more and more legislation aimed at limiting free speech.
• Creating a Climate of Fear: Parliament, the government, and the Supreme Council of Cyberspace are developing policies to instill fear in civil society and criminalize the free flow of information.
• No Legal Gap to Fill: These new measures are being introduced even though existing laws already give the government wide powers to crack down on speech.
• The Third Anti-Free Speech Bill in 40 Days: The “Art, Media, and Cyberspace Working Group” of the Parliament’s Cultural Commission, led by hardline MP Hamid Rasaee, has been working on the “Regulation of Cyberspace” plan for over a year. However, its swift submission followed the government’s withdrawal of the “Bill to Combat the Publication of False News Content in Cyberspace.”

Filterwatch has learned that the “Regulation of Cyberspace” plan shares significant similarities with the government’s withdrawn bill in at least three key areas:

The official submission of a plan in parliament means it has been registered with the legislative office and referred to a commission by the presiding board. This may explain why some members of the Cultural Commission claimed to be unaware of its contents.

While the “Regulation of Cyberspace” plan is being colloquially referred to as “Protection Plan 2.0,” it more closely resembles a second version of the “Bill to Combat False News Content in Cyberspace.” Both lay out broad, vague offenses — like “damaging someone’s honor,” “hurting psychological security,” “undermining state institutions,” “creating public fear,” or “disrupting social peace” — and both require online platforms to monitor and screen content.

They also give new powers to multiple government bodies, including the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, the Ministry of Communications, and the judiciary and security forces. However, since the “Regulation of Cyberspace” plan is still new, it could change significantly before it reaches a full parliamentary vote and review by the Guardian Council.

Intensifying Control: The “Enhanced Espionage Penalties” Bill

The 12th Parliament had previously approved the “Enhanced Espionage Penalties” bill. By expanding the scope of security crimes, particularly “corruption on Earth” (Efsad-fil-arz), to include technological and media activities and explicitly criminalizing the use of modern communication tools like Starlink, the bill took a major step toward intensifying control over public and digital spaces and intimidating civil society.

This bill, finalized on July 14th, 2025, after the Guardian Council’s objections were addressed, contains at least two articles that directly target freedom of expression and the right to free access to the internet.

Article 4 says that taking part in political, cultural, media, or propaganda activities; fabricating or exaggerating damage; or producing and sharing “false news” or other content that causes public fear, division, or threatens national security can be punished with a Grade 3 prison sentence and a permanent ban from government or public service. This is unless the offense is considered “corruption on Earth,” which carries harsher penalties.

It also sets penalties for sending videos, images, or information to foreign or “hostile” media or online pages deemed harmful to national security. If these actions don’t meet the threshold for more serious charges, they carry a Grade 5 prison sentence and a permanent ban from public service. Holding protests or gatherings during wartime is punishable by a Grade 4 prison sentence.

Article 5 bans the use, transport, purchase, sale, or import of unlicensed satellite internet communication tools, such as Starlink, for personal use. Such actions are punishable by a Grade 6 discretionary prison sentence and equipment confiscation. Installing, setting up, or importing such tools for distribution is punishable by a Grade 5 discretionary prison sentence. 

All of these actions, if carried out with the intent to counter the state or for espionage purposes, will be subject to a Grade 4 discretionary prison sentence, provided they do not qualify as “corruption on Earth” or “waging war against God.”

The Same Content, Different Names

The overall censorship policies of the Islamic Republic are not limited to these recent plans and bills influenced by the “12-Day War.” Over the past four years, various institutions have passed numerous laws and regulations to enforce a policy of silence and censorship.

Globally, there are four main models for how people access information online: the liberal, American, European, and Chinese approaches. The liberal model supports completely free and open access for everyone. The American model, driven by the free market, leaves questions of access and privacy to be handled between users and private companies rather than the government. The European model focuses on protecting individual rights, privacy, and personal data. The Chinese model is based on “digital sovereignty”: the idea that a government should control its online space just as it controls its physical borders.

This is the same idea that the Islamic Republic has been trying to implement for years. Under the guise of protecting digital borders, the government seeks to suppress freedom of expression and limit users’ access to information.

In late 2020, the Supreme Council of Cyberspace approved the “Mandatory Document for Preventing and Combating the Publication of False Information, News, and Content.” 

The main objectives of this document were:

• Regulating content publication in cyberspace
• Combating fake news
• Validating news sources

According to this resolution, “any information, news, or news content published in cyberspace, whether text, audio, video, or multimedia, that disrupts public order, creates anxiety, undermines stability, cohesion, trust, health, and individual and social security in economic, social, and political dimensions, or leads to illicit gains, is considered a crime.”

At the time, the council tasked the judiciary with “specifying instances of clear crime” and adjusting punishments. The Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance was also instructed to “develop comprehensive mechanisms for monitoring and verifying news and information published in cyberspace.” In collaboration with the Attorney General’s Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the ministry was also required to create a “legal documentation system to take action against uncooperative foreign platforms.”

In January 2025, the Supreme Council of Cyberspace passed a similar resolution that criminalized the publication of “fake news” online. This resolution effectively restricts user interaction, content creation, and information sharing. It also mandated the government to “review and revise measures to combat criminal content on domestic and foreign platforms.” Concurrently, in February 2023, the Parliament’s Judicial Commission drafted a bill proposing penalties of 10 to 15 years in prison, fines, and 5 to 10 years of social deprivation for celebrities and popular public figures who publish content that contradicts official government statements.

This crackdown on freedom of expression is not limited to official resolutions. In the spring and summer of 2022, the Cyber Police implemented an “operational plan against rumor-mongering in cyberspace” and arrested several social media users.

New Regulations Despite Existing Legal Frameworks

All of these new laws and regulations have been drafted and passed despite there being no legal vacuum. 

The following are a few examples of existing laws that cover the same issues:

• Article 609 of the Islamic Penal Code (Discretionary Punishments): “Anyone who insults the heads of the three branches of government or their deputies, ministers, members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, members of the Assembly of Experts, members of the Guardian Council, judges, members of the Court of Audit, employees of ministries, government institutions and companies and municipalities, armed forces, etc., while on duty or because of their duty, shall be sentenced to three to six months imprisonment or up to 74 lashes or a fine of 50,000 to 1,000,000 rials.”
• Article 697 of the Islamic Penal Code: “Anyone who, through printed or handwritten documents, or by publishing in newspapers and periodicals, or by speaking in public gatherings, or by any other means, explicitly attributes an act to a person that is considered a crime by law, without being able to prove the truth of the attribution, shall be considered a slanderer and be sentenced to three months to one year in prison and up to 74 lashes or one of these punishments.”
• Article 513 of the Islamic Penal Code: “Anyone who insults Islamic sanctities, any of the great prophets, the infallible imams (peace be upon them), or Lady Fatima Zahra (peace be upon her) shall be executed if the act is considered an insult to the Prophet, and if not, shall be sentenced to one to five years in prison.”
• Article 500 of the Islamic Penal Code: “Anyone who engages in propaganda activities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or in favor of groups and organizations opposed to the state shall be sentenced to three months to one year in prison.”
• Article 698 of the Islamic Penal Code: “Anyone who, with the intent to harm others or disturb the public mind or official authorities, expresses an untrue matter in writing or verbally, or, with the same intentions, distorts actions contrary to the truth on their own or as a quotation, whether through the press or otherwise, shall be sentenced to two months to two years in prison or up to 74 lashes.”
• Article 18 of the Computer Crimes Law: “Anyone who, with the intent to harm others or disturb the public mind or official authorities, publishes falsehoods through computer or telecommunication systems shall be sentenced to ninety-one days to two years in prison or a fine or both.”

Despite the existence and enforcement of these laws, Iran’s cyberspace policy continues to move toward greater blockage and user suppression. In the days following the ceasefire between Iran and Israel, dozens of people in various Iranian cities were arrested for media support of Israel, taking photos and cooperating with Israel, and showing support for Israel on social media.