Curtailing Free Expression, Opinion and Information Online in Southeast Asia iv. Laws which aim to protect the security of the nation or public order While sedition laws aim to protect “public order” by preventing expression deemed insulting to or critical of the Head of State or members of a ruling government, other laws have been wielded to curtail free expression, which purport to ensure “public order” through protecting the State itself. This section looks at how such laws in Laos, Vietnam and Myanmar allow for abusive interpretation and enforcement by officials who are given unfettered discretion to conflate the perceived interests of the ruling government with the security and order of the State itself. Such laws may be vaguely framed as laws to prevent “propaganda against the State”, protect against the release of information deemed “prejudicial to the security of the State” or prevent “incitement” of crimes deemed to affect “public order”. Public order and national security are two purposes recognized as legitimate for limitations on fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression under article 19(3) of the ICCPR. However, any such limitations of restrictions must be strictly in line with the principles of legality, necessity and proportionality.299 In 2013, the Tshwane Principles were promulgated to provide guidance in the drafting, revision or implementation of laws with respect to the authority of the state to bar disclosure of information on national security grounds.300 The Tshwane Principles provide guidance that information should be barred from disclosure only if disclosure poses a “real and identifiable risk of significant harm to a legitimate national security interest” (Principle 3); information should never be withheld “in any circumstances”, if they concern “gross violations of human rights or serious violations of international humanitarian law, including crimes under international law, and systematic or widespread violations of the rights to personal liberty and security” (Principle 10A); no public entity may be exempt from disclosure requirements (Principle 5) and the State has a duty to publicly provide information on classification of information (Principles 11, 12).301 299 “The relation between right and restriction and between norm and exception must not be reversed.” See CCPR/C/GC/34, para 21. 300 In 2013, the Tshwane Principles were released as the result of a process facilitated by the Open Society Justice Initiative and involving the participation of the ICJ and other civil society organizations, governments, former security officials, human rights defenders and academics. The Principles address in a detailed manner the standards to be applied when States seek to shield information from public disclosure. See ICJ, ‘New global principles on the right to information launched’, 12 June 2013, Available at: https://www.icj.org/new-global-principles-on-the-right-toinformation-launched/ 301 The Tshwane Principles available at: https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/GlobalPrinciples-on-National-Security-and-the-Right-to-Information-Tshwane-Principles-June-2013.pdf 85