Here is a summarized and humanized version of the content, structured into six paragraphs as requested.
—
In an era where seeing is no longer believing, the trust we place in our own eyes and ears has become a fragile commodity. This is especially true during elections, when the very foundation of democracy rests on an informed electorate making decisions based on truth. Recognizing this unprecedented challenge, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has taken a bold and forward-thinking step. The Commission has proposed a comprehensive set of safeguards designed to shield voters from the deceptive power of artificial intelligence, specifically targeting the malicious use of deepfakes and manipulated campaign material. This move is not just about keeping pace with technology; it is about protecting the sanctity of the ballot box. By putting forward amendments to the “Code of Conduct for Political Parties,” the ECP is drawing a clear line in the sand: the digital battlefield of a political campaign must not become a swamp of lies that tricks citizens into making decisions based on falsehoods. The proposed rules would hold parties, candidates, election agents, and even their most fervent supporters accountable for the content they create and spread, making it explicitly clear that using AI to weave a fabric of deception is a serious electoral offense. At its heart, this initiative is a recognition that the most powerful tool in any democracy is the informed conscience of its people, and that conscience must be protected from algorithmic manipulation.
The core of the proposed code focuses on radical transparency for any AI-generated content used in campaigns. No longer would a sophisticatedly altered video or a cloned voice be allowed to masquerade as authentic. Under the new rules, any campaign material that has been generated or substantially altered by artificial intelligence—whether it be deceptive images, videos, audio clips, or synthetic voices—would be required to carry a “clear and conspicuous disclosure” plainly identifying its AI origins. This is a direct strike against the silent manipulation that deepfakes enable, where a voter might hear a candidate say something they never said or see them act in a way they never did. Furthermore, the proposal enforces a strict ban on using deepfake technology to create false, derogatory, or defamatory likenesses of a wide range of individuals. This protective umbrella extends not just to candidates and party leaders, but also to their supporters, election officials, and notably, members of the judiciary, the armed forces, and other state functionaries, thereby safeguarding the integrity of state institutions from being dragged into dirty political tricks. Beyond visual and audio manipulation, the ECP has also set its sights on the artificial inflation of public support. Political parties and candidates would be barred from using AI-based bots or automated accounts to manufacture fake trends, likes, comments, shares, and followers—a practice that creates a dangerous illusion of momentum and popularity. Even the use of AI for voter outreach, such as robocalls with cloned voices, would require a clear disclosure at the start of the message. Perhaps most importantly, parties would be obligated to keep meticulous records of all AI-assisted campaign content, making them answerable to the ECP and ensuring that the digital footprints of a campaign can be traced and scrutinized if needed.
The ECP’s vision extends far beyond just the political parties themselves, acknowledging that the ecosystem of information includes the media and social media influencers who shape public perception. The proposed amendments place a significant responsibility on print, electronic, and digital media outlets—as well as journalists, television channels, and social media personalities—to act as gatekeepers of truth. They must clearly label and disclose any election-related material that has been generated or manipulated by AI, ensuring that audiences are never unknowingly consuming synthetic content. This requirement applies at the moment of broadcast, publication, or circulation, making transparency a non-negotiable condition of disseminating information. The same strict prohibition on creating fake, derogatory, or defamatory synthetic likenesses of candidates, officials, and state functionaries would also apply to the media, preventing them from becoming tools of disinformation. However, the code is not a luddite’s rejection of technology; it wisely allows media organizations to use AI for content generation, translation, anchoring, or analysis, provided they are transparent about its use and assume full responsibility for the accuracy of what they publish. To enforce these standards, the ECP has designated real-world watchdogs: the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra), the Social Media Protection Regulatory Authority (SMPRA), and the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA). These bodies would be tasked with actively monitoring the vast digital landscape, identifying undisclosed or unlabelled AI-generated content, taking punitive action against violators, and reporting their findings to the ECP. Furthermore, media platforms would be compelled to promptly take down or correctly relabel any misleading AI content upon direction, ensuring that falsehoods do not get a long shelf life.
The role of election observers is also being redefined for the digital age. Traditionally, these observers have been the eyes and ears of the electoral process, deployed to physically witness voting and counting. The ECP’s proposed rules recognize that these observers must now also navigate the digital battlefield. They would be required to remain vigilant about AI-generated or manipulated content, including deepfakes, synthetic audio, and AI-driven disinformation that they might encounter during their observation. If they stumble upon such deceptive material, their duty would be to report it promptly to the ECP, acting as a first line of defense against the spread of fake commentary about the election. Crucially, they are prohibited from further disseminating the content, preventing them from inadvertently amplifying the very misinformation they are meant to flag. The code also takes a firm stand on the integrity of the observers’ own reporting. They would be strictly prohibited from using AI tools to fabricate, alter, or embellish their observations, findings, photographs, videos, or final reports. This ensures that the official record of an election remains an authentic, human-level view of what actually transpired. By insisting that reports reflect factual, genuine, and first-hand assessments, the ECP is reinforcing the fundamental principle that while technology can be a powerful aid, it must never replace the unvarnished truth of human observation. An observer’s report is a sacred document of democratic validation, and it must be free from any algorithmic manipulation.
The impetus behind these comprehensive amendments is deeply rooted in the ECP’s constitutional mandate. The Commission is not merely reacting to technological trends but is proactively fulfilling its fundamental duty to ensure that elections are conducted “honestly, justly, and fairly.” The rise of generative AI presents an existential threat to this mandate, creating unprecedented avenues for corrupt practices and manipulation. The spread of a highly realistic fake video in the final days of a campaign could single-handedly overturn the outcome of an election, making a mockery of the democratic process. The ECP’s rationale is simple but profound: if voters cannot trust what they see and hear, then the entire electoral process loses its legitimacy. By moving to guard against the manipulation of the electoral process through misleading AI-generated content, the ECP is acknowledging that the battle for democracy is no longer fought only in the streets and polling stations, but also in the complex algorithms that power our digital lives. This is a recognition that the integrity of an election is not just about the security of ballot boxes but also about the integrity of the information space. In a world saturated with content, the ability to distinguish the real from the fabricated is itself a form of civic empowerment, and the ECP is seeking to fortify that ability. This move signifies a mature understanding of modern electoral challenges, signaling that Pakistan is willing to confront the dark side of technology head-on to protect the bright promise of democratic governance.
Finally, this is a proposal that invites collaboration and public participation. The ECP has uploaded the proposed provisions to its official website and shared them with stakeholders, opening a crucial window for feedback. Recognizing that the challenge of AI disinformation is a collective one, the Commission is not imposing these rules in a vacuum but is actively seeking input from the citizens, political parties, media houses, and experts who will be affected by and benefit from this code. They have set a deadline of November 20, 2026, for suggestions to be submitted to the ECP Secretariat in Islamabad. This consultation period is a testament to the democratic spirit of the initiative, allowing for a refining of the rules to ensure they are effective, practical, and just. As the digital landscape continues to evolve at a breakneck pace, this public dialogue becomes an essential part of crafting a resilient electoral framework. While the fight against AI-driven deception may never be fully won, this proactive move by the ECP establishes a vital precedent. It sends a clear message that in the digital age, the guardians of democracy must not be passive. They must be vigilant, adaptive, and transparent, employing rules and regulations to ensure that the voice of the people is never drowned out by the synthetic noise of malicious machines.