In a world increasingly driven by data, where over 50 billion connected devices generate vast amounts of information daily, the tools of digital surveillance and control are becoming both more sophisticated and more dangerous. As Cummings et al. (2018) warn, ‘information will become an even more powerful tool for development, coordination, persuasion, and coercion’ (p. 3). For authoritarian regimes, such as Bahrain, the digital domain has become a crucial instrument for consolidating power and eroding human rights.

Recent estimates from Reporters Without Borders place Bahrain among the countries where internet censorship is classified as ‘pervasive.’ Three applications of digital technology have been integral to the Bahraini government’s abuses: censorship, mass surveillance, and propaganda. These actions have created a substantial power imbalance between the government and its citizens, posing direct threats to fundamental human rights, including freedoms of movement, speech, and privacy. This climate of control disproportionately affects marginalized groups, heightening social tensions and making resistance more challenging. A report by Amnesty International identifies the use of spyware and tracking tools to monitor and harass targeted individuals, which deepens existing power imbalances and further erodes personal freedom and security. More specifically, research by the Citizens Lab reveals how Bahraini authorities have deployed spyware, such as NSO Group’s Pegasus software, to surveil activists, journalists, and opposition figures. The findings underscore how persistent surveillance, compounded by physical coercion, has cultivated an environment where even virtual spaces are unsafe.

Additionally, Bahrain’s use of state-sponsored internet filtering systems exemplifies digital authoritarianism. Enforced by the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority, these systems require all internet service providers to comply with government mandates to block content critical of the regime. During periods of protest or political unrest, these systems can impose complete internet shutdowns, restricting access to information and suppressing dissent. This is exacerbated by authorities who monitor and track individuals merely for engaging with, or even following, content deemed critical of the regime. Such individuals often face severe penalties under broad and vaguely defined anti-terrorism legislation or the Cybercrime Law of 2014, which permits harsh punishments for actions that should fall under the protection of free expression.

In fact, this law has been used to justify arrests for online activities, including posts or tweets critical of the government. A prominent example is the arrest of activist Nabeel Rajab, who was sentenced after tweeting about civilian casualties from the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, torture in Jau Prison, and religious fanaticism within the Ministry of Interior. Authorities dismissed his tweets as false, leading to charges under the Media Regulation Law. Such actions highlight how the Bahraini government leverages digital spaces to cultivate an atmosphere of fear and repression, and Rajab’s case is not an isolated incident. Numerous documented cases reveal a pattern of unjust censorship and arrests of civilians in Bahrain. In 2021 alone, the Bahrain Press Association reported at least 49 violations of media freedom, including arrests of journalists and activists targeted for their online comments. Consequently, citizens living under such repression are silenced not only in physical spaces but also on the very platforms where they might otherwise express their views, organize, or mobilize for change.

When the digital realm becomes an arena for authoritarian control, it transforms not only individual communication but also the broader lived experience. In Bahrain, this digital dominance has reshaped governance, extending human rights violations into the virtual sphere. As technology advances, so too does the regime’s capacity to intensify its repression, leaving citizens increasingly vulnerable both online and offline. Ignoring this issue has dire consequences, as tools initially designed to empower consumers are now progressively exploited as instruments of oppression.