FGDs4 were conducted over the period of August to October 2021. The KII and FGDs were targeted to include participants with varied backgrounds across 4 main geographical areas: Yangon Region, Mandalay Region, Rakhine State and those currently in hiding or in exile (See Annex I for more detail on the participants and questions). Our research team conducted KIIs and FGDs with a broad range of stakeholders active in protecting FoE and human rights. This included journalists, artists, civil society members, members of youth led organizations, students and those working within the field of digital literacy. Interview questions explored various aspects of FoE and human rights in post-coup Myanmar and were guided by questions exploring the topics of journalism, art, social media, culture, and communication. The respondents for qualitative study were chosen in part due to their respective backgrounds and contexts, as well as through existing trusted networks. Youth specifically were targeted for the qualitative study because of their predominant role as social media and internet users. Besides KIIs and FGDs, a survey was conducted to collect quantitative between 18th August - 8th September 2021 targeting youth. The survey questionnaire was distributed via Facebook groups, pages, messenger groups, Telegram channels, and Signal to various youth groups in Yangon, Mandalay and Rakhine states. A total of 92 responded to the survey of which 61% identified as women, 37% as men and 2% as LGBTQI. All participants were youth. The survey questionnaire is available in here [https://bit.ly/3mXRKSW]. To help focus the research questions and thus inform research design, as well as supplement the primary data, this report conducted a comprehensive literature review that covered reports from various institutions and agencies, academic literature, articles in the media, legislation and rules and regulations. Therefore, all data gathered was analyzed and triangulated by using multiple sources. The 4 A total of 34 respondents participated in seven FGDS (FGD 1: 4, FGD2: 4, FGD3: 8, FGD4: 8, FGD5: 4, FGD 6: 3, FGD 7: 3) 49% 37% 28% 16-19 2% 11% 12% 20-24 25-30 31-35 Age 61% Female Male Other Gender Figure 1 Survey respondents according to age and gender benefit of adopting mixed method research design is that it allows for cross checking and cross referencing of facts using multiple sources, adding rigor and depth in the analysis. 2.3 RESEARCH LIMITATIONS This study was affected by a number of limitations relating to the extremely challenging context for carrying out research in Myanmar currently. Many compromises were made in designing this study, to prioritize the safety and security of the research team and the respondents over the desire for a statistically rigorous set of findings. That said, it has resulted in the project taking a qualitative approach that draws on narratives and dialogue to derive meaning, that has surprised and enlightened the research team in new and interesting ways. While this study is aimed at providing a descriptive and quantitative assessment of the status of FoE in post-coup Myanmar, its primary focus is on the FoE in cyberspace. While this report attempts to provide a bigger picture of FoE, the narrow focus on cyberspace emphasizes the experiences of those respondents who can use the internet and social media. To explore the experiences of non-internet users in Myanmar is beyond the scope of this study. While this study explores the legal aspect of FoE, it focuses more on capturing the experiences of youth and women in post-coup Myanmar. Narrowing our sample of respondents required a combination of convenience and snowball sampling that has limited the extent to which our sample represents an accurate cross-section of individuals in terms of interests and/or demographics. It should also be noted that our decision to focus on activists, media and others involved in the resistance against the junta, means that any findings should be viewed with this in mind. This group is clearly likely to be more informed about issues relating to FoE and democracy and it should not necessarily be assumed that their views would be replicated in wider society. 15