Links
Next content
Read more
Technical Report
Rethinking media freedom in a platform-driven world
Key takeaways: Media, the rule of law, democratic values, and platform capture: media freedom and pluralism are essential pillars of the rule of law in the European Union and merit targeted protection in the...
The pervasive influence of the internet continues to reshape communication, economic activity, and political engagement across the globe. Its expansion has also ignited a profound debate regarding its governance, pitting visions of an open, globally connected network against models emphasising national control and sovereignty. This tension is nowhere more evident than in the development and implementation of Iran’s National Information Network (NIN). Originally framed as a project for enhancing domestic connectivity, fostering local content, and ensuring digital sovereignty, the NIN has, over the years, played a central role in enabling the Iranian government to impose systemic information restrictions, particularly during crises such as the 2019 protests, the 2022 Mahsa Amini uprising, and most recently, the internet shutdowns and censorship measures during the 2025 war with Israel. It is widely criticised by human rights organisations1 as a powerful infrastructure for state surveillance, censorship, and control over the flow of information, particularly during periods of dissent. This brief dissects this duality. It analyses the complex role of NIN, evaluating its purported contributions to internet access and digital development alongside its documented functions as a tool for government suppression. Furthermore, it examines the relationship between the NIN’s architecture and operational reality and the core commitments made by governments in international commitments such as the Global Digital Compact.2 This brief contends that while the NIN has facilitated the expansion of certain domestic digital infrastructures, its fundamental design and practical implementation prioritise state control and information management, placing it in direct opposition to the foundational principles of a free, open, and rights-centric global internet.