CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS Gaining a better understanding of how respondents define and re-define FoE throughout various circumstances has been central throughout this research. By focusing not only on the developments that have taken place in the digital world in which youth engage, but also on the reasoning and rationale behind their participation online, the findings reflect an evolving, and at times even contradictory perception by youth. 4.1 UNDERSTANDING OF FOE AMONG YOUTH “Only when the right to express themselves are held, there will be a society that is free and fair. Without this – society will always be unfair. It’s a fundamental right” (KII_02) The study found that youth in Myanmar have a solid and coherent understanding of FoE. While some described it as a basic human right, others expressed that censoring FoE represents a denial of human rights. Furthermore, respondents considered FoE to be absolute and inalienable. Many also reflected that while exercising FoE, one should not infringe upon the rights of others and needs to be careful. “I think that it is linked to human rights, and as a human we need to have the freedom to speak, disagree, express, it is just exercising our rights as a human. Depending on the content of your speech, it should not harm others.” (FGD_04) Several factors have played a role in shaping this understanding. A decade (2011-2021) of nascent democratic practice; several democratic reforms during this period; vibrant growth of civil society and youth activism and collective action, are among them. In the survey, more than two thirds (70%) of the respondents felt that prior to the February 2021 military coup, people had the right to express themselves freely. Considering that internet freedom in Myanmar declined dramatically in 2020 (Freedom House, 2021), this may point to a certain degree of idealization by survey participants of the situation prior to the coup. Further discussion, however, with focus group participants and interviewees - which included journalists and artists - demonstrated a less favorable perception of FoE pre-coup. Many referred to topics that were ‘off limits’ pre-coup, including the Rohingya crisis and religion. “It [FoE] has always been restricted […] Before the coup we couldn’t talk about the Rakhine issue, before that we couldn’t talk about the military. After the coup, it’s severely restricted.” (FGD_07) (Male). 19