Myanmar: Digital Content Proposals Note: A defence has been added here for service providers who merely provide telecommunications services, unless they act with the specific intent of attempting, conspiring to commit or abetting a crime. 73A. Where the offences in sections 66A, 69 and 73 involve expressive activity they shall not apply where it is established that the person involved acted in the public interest. Note: This sort of public interest defence for expression crimes is necessary to balance the protection of national security and other interests with the right to freedom of expression. 75. A court may authorise relevant Union Government officials or organisations to intercept information and/or telecommunications where necessary to protect national security or the maintenance of law and order against a serious risk of harm, as long as this does not undermine the fundamental rights of citizens. Note: A requirement to obtain court authorisation for the interception of information has been added, as this is a normal requirement for this sort of State action. The condition of protecting against a serious risk of harm has also been added. 77. [Repealed] Note: This provision has been repealed. Experience in countries around the world clearly demonstrates that it is not necessary for government to wield this sort of power. Where necessary, a court may, under section 75, authorise an information intercept. And, where a telecommunications service provider is acting illegally or causing harm, courts can also act urgently to take action under laws such as the Penal Code. - 10 -