Reporters Without Borders says the Taliban have “weaponized” Afghanistan’s legal and regulatory system against the press, turning a succession of media restrictions imposed over five years into an increasingly formal framework for controlling journalism and suppressing critical reporting.
The organization says more than 20 nationwide directives, alongside provincial orders, have restricted everything from criticism of Taliban officials and political programming to women’s voices, journalists’ choice of guests and the terminology news organizations are required to use.
In a report marking five years since the Taliban returned to power, RSF traces a series of decrees, directives and verbal orders issued by Taliban institutions from September 2021 through January 2026.
The organization says the measures have restricted criticism of Taliban officials, rebroadcasting of international media, the appearance and voices of women, live political programmes, the selection of guests and experts, images of living beings and reporting on politically sensitive issues.
RSF describes the process as a five-year deterioration in press freedom and says the restrictions have moved from administrative and verbal instructions toward an increasingly formal legal framework.
According to the report, that process entered a new phase in January 2026 with the introduction of the Taliban’s Criminal Procedure Regulation of the Courts.
RSF says the regulation was drafted without public consultation and became available to journalists and human rights organizations through leaks. While it does not explicitly mention the press, the organization says it provides no protections or exceptions for journalistic work.
Article 23, according to RSF, gives Taliban judges broad powers to suppress dissenting and critical views, potentially providing courts with a standing legal mechanism that could be used against journalists and commentators.
Célia Mercier of RSF says the regulation effectively puts into legal form restrictions accumulated during five years of Taliban rule.
She says its provisions could allow judges to punish criticism of officials, contacts with opponents of the Taliban and reporting on sensitive political issues.
RSF also warns that journalists could potentially be compelled to provide information about sources or colleagues, threatening the confidentiality of sources and making independent reporting more dangerous.
“With its vague definitions of rebellion, subversion and heresy—and the severe penalties attached to them—the regulation can be a powerful legal instrument for silencing journalists, commentators and other perceived critics,” she said.
Restrictions began weeks after Taliban takeover
RSF’s timeline shows that some of the first nationwide media restrictions were introduced within weeks of the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021.
In September 2021, the Taliban’s government media office, operating under the Ministry of Information and Culture, introduced what became known as the “11 rules of journalism.”
Under those rules, media organizations were instructed not to publish material considered contrary to Islam or insulting to national figures and to respect what the Taliban described as national and private sanctities.
Journalists were also told to avoid distortion, maintain journalistic principles and balance, exercise caution when dealing with unverified or officially unconfirmed information and avoid content deemed to have a negative impact on public opinion or public morale.
The directives additionally required media organizations to maintain neutrality and publish factual information.
But the rules went further than general editorial standards. According to RSF, detailed reports were to be coordinated with the government media office, which also prepared a standardized form to assist journalists and media organizations in compiling reports.
RSF condemned the rules at the time, describing their language as vague and warning that they could be used to persecute journalists.
Later that same month, Taliban moved to regulate how media organizations referred to the new authorities.
A six-point directive dated September 25, 2021, signed by Zabihullah Mujahid and sent to some television stations in Kabul, instructed media not to refer to their authorities as the “Taliban group.”
The directive said that because the Taliban controlled Afghanistan, media organizations should instead use the name “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.”
Five of the six instructions in that letter had previously been communicated, according to the RSF report; the requirement concerning the official name of the Taliban government was contained in its sixth point.
Restrictions on women in the media
Women working in broadcasting became the subject of another set of restrictions shortly afterward.
In November 2021, the Taliban’s Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice introduced guidelines governing the appearance of female television presenters.
The restrictions, justified by the Taliban on the basis of what they described as “Islamic values,” required women appearing on television to cover their faces except for their eyes.
RSF condemned the measure.
Restrictions on women later expanded beyond their appearance on television to their voices on radio and in public information, RSF says.
The Taliban’s Law on the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, introduced in July 2024, codified a provision that a woman’s voice “must not be heard outside her home,” according to RSF.
The law also prohibited the broadcast of images of living beings and expanded the authority of inspectors from the Taliban Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice to monitor whether published material and public information complied with the Taliban’s interpretation of Sharia.
By March 2025, RSF says, restrictions on women’s voices were being explicitly incorporated into provincial media directives.
RSF says the Taliban’s directorate of information and culture in Kandahar issued what it called “Essential Guidelines for Kandahar Radio Stations,” under which women’s voices were strictly prohibited on radio.
The guidelines also banned the broadcasting of messages from women in entertainment programmes.
International broadcasters taken off local airwaves
The Taliban also moved against the local rebroadcasting of international media.
In March 2022, the Ministry of Information and Culture prohibited Afghan broadcasters from rebroadcasting programming from the US-funded Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty on FM frequencies.
According to RSF, the Taliban cited content they considered contrary to the “national interest” as well as issues involving presenters’ dress.
The order effectively stopped local rebroadcasting of the two US-funded broadcasters.
Several months later, restrictions were expanded to criticism of Taliban officials.
In July 2022, Taliban leader Hibatullah Akhundzada issued a decree prohibiting what Taliban authorities called “unproven allegations” against officials.
According to RSF, the Taliban justified the decree on the grounds that criticism of officials was contrary to Islamic law. RSF describes the measure as effectively criminalizing criticism of government employees.
Taliban restructured media complaints commission
Taliban also revived an institution originally established under the former republic.
In August 2022, the Taliban Ministry of Information and Culture re-established the Media Complaints and Rights Violations Commission under a new structure.
The commission had originally been established under Afghanistan’s media law during the republic and could issue recommendations and warnings or refer media organizations and journalists accused of violations to judicial institutions.
Under the Taliban, however, its composition changed substantially, RSF said.
According to RSF, the Taliban’s minister of information and culture became chair of the commission, with another five representatives from the ministry sitting on it.
Representatives of the Taliban’s ministries of justice and promotion of virtue and prevention of vice and the Taliban General Directorate of Intelligence were also included.
The commission additionally included a representative of Kabul University’s journalism faculty, four representatives from journalism organizations and three media representatives.
RSF says the reorganization centralized the review of media disputes under a body controlled by the Taliban authorities.
Former media law abolished
A major change in the legal environment came in 2024.
RSF says that on April 12 that year, the Taliban’s Ministry of Justice announced that laws enacted under the previous government had been repealed.
That included the 2015 media law.
RSF says abolishing the law removed a legal framework that had underpinned two decades of comparatively greater media freedom in Afghanistan. The Taliban said the legal changes were intended to bring the country’s laws into conformity with Sharia.
Three months later, in July 2024, the Law on the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice introduced another layer of restrictions directly affecting the media.
Besides restrictions concerning women’s voices, the law prohibited broadcast images of living beings and authorized morality inspectors to monitor publications and public information for compliance with the Taliban’s interpretation of Sharia.
Live political programmes and guests restricted
RSF says restrictions on broadcasters became more detailed in September 2024.
According to RSF, the Ministry of Information and Culture introduced new rules that banned live political programming.
Media organizations were also required to obtain approval for the guests appearing on their programmes.
RSF says broadcasters were permitted to invite specialists from a list of more than 68 people designated as “experts.”
The rules also prohibited criticism of Taliban laws on air.
The Taliban described the measures as intended to prevent what they called “weak points” in media coverage.
By March 2025, provincial-level directives had added another set of requirements.
The “Essential Guidelines for Kandahar Radio Stations,” issued by the provincial Directorate of Information and Culture, prescribed not only what could be broadcast but also the terminology journalists were required to use, RSF says.
According to RSF, radio programmes and reports were instructed to refer to Hibatullah Akhundzada exclusively with an honorific equivalent to “His Excellency Amir al-Mu’minin, may Allah protect him,” while the Taliban government was to be called the “Islamic Emirate.”
Women’s voices were completely prohibited from radio broadcasts, including women’s messages used in entertainment programmes.
Journalists travelling within Kandahar to prepare reports or programmes were also required to obtain official permits from the Taliban provincial Directorate of Information and Culture, RSF says.
RSF says journalists from elsewhere in Afghanistan told the organization that this permit requirement was being applied in other provinces as well.
The Kandahar directive additionally required journalists and media organizations to describe Taliban officials killed in attacks or other circumstances as “martyrs.”
The guidelines represented another stage in the development of provincial restrictions alongside the more than 20 national directives RSF says have been imposed since 2021.
Restrictions have now entered criminal law
RSF identifies the January 2026 Criminal Procedure Regulation of the Courts as the latest and potentially most consequential step in this progression.
The regulation was issued by Taliban leader Hibatullah Akhundzada.
According to RSF, Article 23 grants judges broad and effectively unlimited powers to act against dissenting and critical views.
The organization argues that this gives Taliban courts an established legal instrument that could be deployed against journalists and commentators.
RSF’s concern is also based on what the regulation does not contain: although it does not specifically name journalists or the media, it provides no explicit protection for legitimate journalistic reporting.
The organization warns that this omission is particularly significant after five years in which media organizations have already been subjected to overlapping national and provincial restrictions.
In RSF’s assessment, the trajectory since 2021 has moved from rules controlling editorial content to restrictions on terminology, women’s appearance and voices, international broadcasts, criticism of officials, political programming, guests and images, before culminating in a judicial framework that could expose critical reporting itself to criminal punishment.
RSF has called for the repeal of provisions that restrict journalism on vaguely defined religious, moral or “national interest” grounds.
