Closed
This is the weighted total of the four scored pillars.
Country assessmentResearch confidence: Low · Evidence coverage: Standard
Afghanistan · 2026
Afghanistan
Platform restrictions, severe repression of independent expression, monitoring, gender-based exclusion, and the absence of independent legal remedies leave almost no protected online space.
Assessment windowJanuary 1–December 31, 2025
Research cutoffJuly 17, 2026
FrameworkMethodology v0.3 · 20 indicators
Territory coverageAfghanistan under Taliban rule
Finding
01Why Afghanistan received this score.
Platform restrictions, severe repression of independent expression, monitoring, gender-based exclusion, and the absence of independent legal remedies leave almost no protected online space.
The score draws on country reporting, network measurements, shutdown records, journalist cases, privacy law, and rule-of-law data. The indicator findings below show how that evidence was converted into points. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]
Open Internet & Content Controls
Centralized controls sustain nationwide filtering of political information, platforms, or circumvention tools.
Rule of Law & Accountability
No dependable independent remedy constrains political censorship or surveillance in practice.
Standard coverage
8 cited sources support this assessment.
Scored assessment
02Indicator scores.
Each indicator receives 0–4 points. Five indicators form a pillar. The pillar average is converted to a percentage and multiplied by its published weight.
B
30% weight
Open Internet & Content Controls
Centralized controls sustain nationwide filtering of political information, platforms, or circumvention tools.
22.56.8 / 30 points
B1Shutdowns and throttling1.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban restricts news, social content, and communications through decrees, pressure on providers, and local service controls, although parts of the global internet remain reachable.; DSP's 2025 shutdown-practice estimate 3/4; social-media shutdown estimate 2/4; OONI measurements and the Access Now shutdown record provide the incident check. [2][3][4][1]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's B1 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.
B2Website and service blocking0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban restricts news, social content, and communications through decrees, pressure on providers, and local service controls, although parts of the global internet remain reachable.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 0/4 and private discussion 0/4; DSP's 2025 political-filtering estimate 1/4; the country OONI dashboard supplies direct network measurements. [3][1][4]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's B2 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
B3Removal and filtering orders1.0 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban restricts news, social content, and communications through decrees, pressure on providers, and local service controls, although parts of the global internet remain reachable.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 0/4 and private discussion 0/4; DSP's 2025 political-content censorship estimate 2/4; online-speech legal protection 1/4. [2][1][3][4]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's B3 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.
B4Intermediary liability0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban restricts news, social content, and communications through decrees, pressure on providers, and local service controls, although parts of the global internet remain reachable.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 0/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 1/4; protection against legal abuse by political elites 1/4. [2][1][3][4]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's B4 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
B5Circumvention and cross-border access1.0 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban restricts news, social content, and communications through decrees, pressure on providers, and local service controls, although parts of the global internet remain reachable.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 0/4 and private discussion 0/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 1/4; independence from state-controlled social platforms 3/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the circumvention check. [3][1][4]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's B5 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.
C
30% weight
Free Expression & Civic Space
Independent political expression and civic organizing face systematic state repression.
12.53.8 / 30 points
C1Legal protection for expression0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban prohibits criticism, suppresses independent journalism, and imposes exceptionally severe restrictions on women, minorities, and civic activity under threat of detention and violence.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 0/4 and private discussion 0/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 1/4; WJP's effective-expression measure 1.4/4; the relevant Freedom House country score 8/100. [1][7][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's C1 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
C2Speech-related offenses0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban prohibits criticism, suppresses independent journalism, and imposes exceptionally severe restrictions on women, minorities, and civic activity under threat of detention and violence.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 0/4 and due process 0/4; DSP's protection against abuse of defamation and copyright law 1/4; Freedom House country reporting supplies the offense and enforcement record. [2][1][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's C2 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
C3Arrests and penalties0.0 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban prohibits criticism, suppresses independent journalism, and imposes exceptionally severe restrictions on women, minorities, and civic activity under threat of detention and violence.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded due process 0/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; DSP's 2025 political-arrest estimate 0/3; CPJ and Freedom House records provide the documented case check. [2][5][1][8]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's C3 evidence supports 0.0/4. The record matches the zero-point anchor.
C4Harassment, violence, and digital attacks0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban prohibits criticism, suppresses independent journalism, and imposes exceptionally severe restrictions on women, minorities, and civic activity under threat of detention and violence.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 0/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; the 2026 RSF press-freedom score 19.5/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the violence, harassment, and accountability record. [5][8][1]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's C4 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
C5Civic participation and pluralism1.0 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban prohibits criticism, suppresses independent journalism, and imposes exceptionally severe restrictions on women, minorities, and civic activity under threat of detention and violence.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded political choice free from domination 0/4 and assembly freedom 1/4; DSP's online-media pluralism estimate 0/4; ordinary people's online civic-mobilization estimate 3/4; WJP's civic-participation measure 1.5/4. [2][1][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's C5 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.
D
20% weight
Privacy, Anonymity & User Security
Identity, retention, localization, or lawful-access mandates materially restrict anonymous communication.
12.52.5 / 20 points
D1Data protection rights0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: Device searches, security monitoring, identity exposure, and the absence of enforceable privacy safeguards leave little protected private or anonymous political communication.; DSP's privacy-law existence measure 0/1; privacy-law constraint on government access 0/4; WJP's effective-privacy measure 0.5/4. [6][1][2]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's D1 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
D2Surveillance law and authorization0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: Device searches, security monitoring, identity exposure, and the absence of enforceable privacy safeguards leave little protected private or anonymous political communication.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 0/4 and due process 0/4; DSP's protection from political social-media monitoring 1/4; WJP's effective-privacy measure 0.5/4. [1][7][2][6]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's D2 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
D3Retention, access, and identity mandates0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: Device searches, security monitoring, identity exposure, and the absence of enforceable privacy safeguards leave little protected private or anonymous political communication.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded private discussion 0/4 and due process 0/4; DSP's privacy-law constraint on government access 0/4; protection from political monitoring 1/4; UNCTAD and Freedom House records provide the retention and identity-law check. [1][6][2]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's D3 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
D4Targeted surveillance and spyware0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: Device searches, security monitoring, identity exposure, and the absence of enforceable privacy safeguards leave little protected private or anonymous political communication.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 0/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; DSP's protection from political monitoring 1/4; the RSF press-freedom environment 19.5/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the targeted-surveillance case record. [5][1][2][6]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's D4 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
D5Encryption and anonymity0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: Device searches, security monitoring, identity exposure, and the absence of enforceable privacy safeguards leave little protected private or anonymous political communication.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded private discussion 0/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 1/4; protection from political monitoring 1/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the encryption and anonymity check. [3][1][2][6]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's D5 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
E
20% weight
Rule of Law & Accountability
No dependable independent remedy constrains political censorship or surveillance in practice.
5.01.0 / 20 points
E1Judicial independence and due process0.0 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban leader rules by decree without a constitution or representative bodies, and courts and regulators do not provide an independent remedy against the regime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 0/4 and due process 0/4; WJP's judicial-constraint measure 1.2/4; administrative due-process measure 0.9/4; civil-justice independence measure 1.0/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's E1 evidence supports 0.0/4. The record matches the zero-point anchor.
E2Independent regulators0.0 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban leader rules by decree without a constitution or representative bodies, and courts and regulators do not provide an independent remedy against the regime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded government safeguards against corruption 1/4 and government openness and transparency 0/4; WJP's independent-review measure 1.5/4; regulatory independence measure 1.7/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's E2 evidence supports 0.0/4. The record matches the zero-point anchor.
E3Government transparency0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban leader rules by decree without a constitution or representative bodies, and courts and regulators do not provide an independent remedy against the regime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded government openness and transparency 0/4; WJP's publicized-laws measure 0.8/4; right-to-information measure 1.3/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's E3 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
E4Notice, appeal, and remedy0.5 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban leader rules by decree without a constitution or representative bodies, and courts and regulators do not provide an independent remedy against the regime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 0/4 and due process 0/4; WJP's complaint-mechanisms measure 1.4/4; civil-justice access measure 1.6/4; civil-justice enforcement measure 1.8/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's E4 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
E5Open and multistakeholder policymaking0.0 / 4
Observed record
Afghanistan: The Taliban leader rules by decree without a constitution or representative bodies, and courts and regulators do not provide an independent remedy against the regime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded elected officials' authority 0/4 and assembly freedom 1/4; WJP's civic-participation measure 1.5/4; DSP's online civic-mobilization estimate 3/4. [2][1][7]
Scoring judgment
Afghanistan's E5 evidence supports 0.0/4. The record matches the zero-point anchor.
Country findings
03Findings by pillar.
These are the principal findings for each scored part of the report. The indicator records above provide the supporting detail.
Open Internet & Content Controls
Centralized controls sustain nationwide filtering of political information, platforms, or circumvention tools.
[2][3][4]Free Expression & Civic Space
Independent political expression and civic organizing face systematic state repression.
[2][5][8]Privacy, Anonymity & User Security
Identity, retention, localization, or lawful-access mandates materially restrict anonymous communication.
[6][1]Rule of Law & Accountability
No dependable independent remedy constrains political censorship or surveillance in practice.
[7][1]Research record
04Coverage
Afghanistan under Taliban rule, assessed from January 1 through December 31, 2025.
Evidence
Network measurements, legal and institutional datasets, shutdown records, and documented cases support the findings.
Scoring
Twenty indicators measure content openness, expression, privacy, security, and institutional checks under Methodology v0.3.
Source register
05Sources used for this report.
Country reporting, open measurements, and cross-national datasets form the report record.
- 01Freedom HouseAfghanistan: Freedom in the World 2026 country report ↗Civil society · 2026 edition
- 02Digital Society ProjectDigital Society Project Dataset v8 ↗Independent measurement · 2000–2025 country-year data
- 03Open Observatory of Network InterferenceAfghanistan measurement dashboard ↗Independent measurement · Accessed July 17, 2026
- 04Access Now and the #KeepItOn coalitionInternet Shutdowns in 2025 Annual Report ↗Civil society · March 2026
- 05Committee to Protect Journalists2025 journalist prison census and case database ↗Civil society · January 21, 2026
- 06UN Trade and DevelopmentData protection and privacy legislation worldwide ↗International organization · Accessed July 17, 2026
- 07World Justice ProjectRule of Law Index 2025 ↗Independent measurement · October 28, 2025
- 08Reporters Without BordersAfghanistan: World Press Freedom Index 2026 profile ↗Civil society · May 2026