Ever since the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan in 2021, international human rights organisations have repeatedly criticised the group’s harsh style of governance and its systematic curtailment of fundamental freedoms. The latest restrictions on peaceful protest have further narrowed the already limited space for dissent. Human Rights Watch has condemned what it describes as a “ruthless effort to suppress all dissent”, while Amnesty International has characterised the new police law as a sweeping assault on human rights. Such measures reinforce concerns that the Taliban authorities are seeking not merely to control public order but to eliminate almost every avenue through which ordinary Afghans can express disagreement with those in power.
Peaceful protest is a fundamental means through which citizens communicate their grievances to the state. Yet under Taliban rule, public demonstrations have increasingly become difficult and dangerous. Protests against Taliban policies have previously been met with arrests, intimidation and, in some cases, lethal force. The restrictions imposed on women have been particularly severe. Since taking power, the Taliban have progressively curtailed women’s access to education, employment and public life, despite earlier assurances that their government would be more inclusive than during the group’s previous period in power.
The repression has not been limited to women. Journalists, civil society activists, political opponents and minority communities have also faced restrictions and intimidation. Rights organisations have repeatedly raised concerns about the treatment of Afghanistan’s Hazara community, while independent media have struggled to operate in an increasingly restrictive environment. When dissenting voices are silenced and the media is prevented from independently reporting abuses, the public is left with little opportunity to challenge the official version of events.
Authoritarian governments often attempt to control information precisely because controlling the narrative can make state power appear uncontested. But in an interconnected world, suppressing peaceful assembly and independent expression is unlikely to erase public grievances. Instead, excessive restrictions can deepen resentment and further alienate citizens from their rulers. A government that relies primarily on coercion risks creating an environment in which fear replaces legitimacy and silence is mistaken for consent.
The international community, particularly Western countries, also bears responsibility for ensuring that Afghanistan does not disappear from the global human rights agenda. After decades of military and political involvement in the country, the outside world cannot simply look away as Afghans face shrinking civic space and growing restrictions on their basic freedoms. International pressure should be directed towards ensuring that the Taliban authorities engage with ordinary Afghans, protect fundamental rights and honour their earlier commitments regarding inclusivity.
A functioning state does not need to suppress every form of criticism to maintain stability. In democratic societies, authorities generally intervene when protests become violent or involve incitement to hatred or violence. Peaceful disagreement, however, is not a threat to the state; it is an essential component of accountable governance. By treating dissent itself as a danger, the Taliban risk institutionalising repression through law and making further abuses easier to justify.
The latest restrictions therefore represent more than another limitation on public demonstrations. They point towards a broader model of governance in which political conformity is valued over participation, criticism is treated as disobedience and fundamental freedoms are subordinated to the preferences of those in power. Such an approach leaves little room for political development, social progress or meaningful accountability.
Afghanistan’s rulers must recognise that authority cannot rest indefinitely on coercion. Governments derive lasting legitimacy from their ability to protect citizens, respect their rights and respond to their grievances. A rights-based political order would not weaken the state; rather, it would strengthen its legitimacy and prevent power from becoming synonymous with dictatorship. If the Taliban continue down the path of suppressing dissent, they risk extinguishing whatever hope remains for a more inclusive and progressive Afghanistan.
Shafaqna Pakistan
pakistan.shafaqna.com
Note: Shafaqna do not endorse the views expressed in the article
