Laws and Policies Since its amendment in February 2021, the Penal Code has been used mainly to criminalise those who participated in anti-coup demonstrations, especially celebrities who expressed their disagreement towards the junta on their social media accounts. As of May 2021, 120 actors, filmmakers, models and social media influencers have been arrested under Section 505(a) of the Penal Code (RFA, 2021). 2bii. Article 505(b) Under Article 505(b), it is a punishable offence for “whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement, rumour or report with intent to cause or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public or to any section of the public whereby any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquility.” Those found guilty, face imprisonment up to two years and/or a fine for an unspecified amount. While Article 354 of the Constitution recognises freedom of expression, it is a heavily limited guarantee, as characterised by the overly broad term “not contrary to the laws,” and does not meet international human rights standards, which requires that restrictions on rights must be precise, specific and legitimate. Article 505(b) of the Penal Code has been abused in order to suppress freedom of expression and silence dissidents. In October 2019 during the rule of Aung San Suu Kyi’s NLD government, five members of a satirical poetry group were sentenced to one year in prison under the Penal Code for ‘undermining the military,’ after their performance was live-streamed via Facebook (BBC News, 2019a). In May 2020, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) reported that Zaw Ye Htet of online news agency Dae Pyaw was handed a two-year jail sentence under Section 505(b) of the Penal Code, over his Facebook post reporting on an individual who had died from Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Karen State (RSF, 2020). 2c. Telecommunications Law Starting from late 2010, after nearly three decades of self-isolation, Myanmar began to open itself up to the world and the international market. One immediate action taken by the former military government was the liberalisation of the telecommunications industry. It is for this reason that the Telecommunications Law (2013) was passed to provide the legal framework and regulations to guide telecommunication companies and investors. However, Section 66(d) of the law includes a vaguely-worded clause tantamount to criminal defamation. This provision provides for up to three years imprisonment and/or an unspecified fine for “extortion of any person, coercion, unlawful restriction, defamation, interfering, undue influence, or intimidation using a telecommunication network.” Furthermore, termination or disruption of access to the internet may be ordered by the Ministry of Transport and Communication under Section 77 of the Telecommunication Law, which stipulates “on the occurrence of any public emergency, the Ministry, subject to the approval of the Union Government, may, for the duration of the public emergency, direct any licence holder to suspend a telecommunication service, restrict specific forms of communication, jam or intercept any commutation.” Failure of compliance by any telecommunications firms will result in imprisonment of up to six months and/or an unspecified fine amount. In 2019, there were more than 49 criminal cases brought forward under the Telecommunications Law (Athan, 2020). Section 77 was used to enable internet shutdowns in Myanmar, even prior to the 2021 military coup. Conflict between the Arakan Army and the Tatmadaw resulted in complete internet shutdowns enacted by the military in the affected townships, implementing regional digital shutdowns of the politically unstable Rakhine and Chin states from 21 June 2019 all the way up to 2 February 2021, when the internet was restored. The restoration was brief, with implementation of post-coup nationwide shutdowns and internet throttling soon following (The Irrawaddy, 2021a). 08