Laws and Policies 2. Laws and Policies Internet freedoms are not specifically articulated in Myanmar’s legal framework. While the 2008 Constitution makes reference in general terms to freedom of expression, a review of national laws—such as the Penal Code, Telecommunications Law, draft Cybersecurity Law—shows that a key focus has been to deal with criticism against the state and public authorities. These laws have been amended and used to counter online political expression, especially after the 2021 military coup. The declaration of the State of Emergency by General Min Aung Hlaing has provided the military with the authority to introduce a slew of amendments to repress political expression online, such as the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens and the Electronic Transactions Law. This section will examine the existing laws that have facilitated this crackdown, as well as the laws that have been amended, to control the internet and social media as a platform to progress democratic ideals in Myanmar. 2a. Constitution In May 2008, a new Constitution was promulgated pursuant to a referendum, despite international concerns over the free and fair nature of the referendum. The referendum, first announced in 2003, was a by-product of the so-called Myanmar’s Roadmap to Discipline-flourishing Democracy and received support from the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), the name of the former military government which had ruled the country since 1988. While not making direct reference to internet freedoms, Chapter 8 of the Constitution recognises the fundamental rights of Myanmar’s citizens, including individual freedoms, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and association, freedom of religions and belief, the right to education, healthcare, and workers’ rights. On top of this, clauses prohibiting discrimination and obstructions to the exercise of the aforementioned rights are also present. Although a number of basic rights are guaranteed under the Constitution, many provisions in the Constitution, especially when related to the suspension of rights, are not aligned with international human rights standards. For example, the guarantee on freedom of expression, assembly and association under Article 354 is conditioned as the exercise of such rights cannot be “… contrary to the laws … community peace and tranquility or public order and morality.” This limitation does not meet the requirements for restrictions on free expression as laid down in international human rights instruments such as the ICCPR, whose provisions on freedom of expression, as noted earlier, Myanmar is obliged to follow under customary international law. The limitations attached to freedom of expression in the Constitution suggest that laws could be passed that would impermissibly restrict freedom of expression. However, the guarantee of fundamental freedoms under Chapter 8 of the Constitution is that which Myanmar officials refer to and rely on when questioned at UN meetings about the country’s commitment to international human rights obligations. These constitutional legal rights and protections, or lack thereof, also influence how specific laws such as the Penal Code, Electronic Transactions Law and Telecommunications Law, are formulated and implemented, therefore exacerbating the challenge of alignment to international human rights standards. On 1 February 2021, alleging widespread voter fraud in the 2020 general election, the military junta seized power from the civilian government after months of refusal to accept the NLD’s victory. Citing Article 417 and 418 of the Constitution, the Commander-in-Chief General Min Aung Hlaing declared a state of emergency and established the State Administration Council (SAC) to head the interregnum period. However, President Win Myint was unable to perform the functions required under Articles 410 and 417 of the Constitution as he was under military detention. As such, the proclamation of the state of emergency was technically illegal and unconstitutional. Yet, it was used to validate amendments to laws that have drastically infringed upon internet freedoms. 06