Curtailing Free Expression, Opinion and Information Online in Southeast Asia information deemed unfavourable to the ruling government of the State, or been associated with political opposition. Some individuals have been subject to legal harassment by companies for bringing to light human rights violations, without sufficient protections provided by the State to ensure that they can carry out their research, advocacy or reporting independently and safely – in contravention of the UNGPs. This report has highlighted specific cases which reflect the politicallymotivated nature of these prosecutions and how “national security” has often been conflated with protecting the ruling government from criticism. The sedition cases brought against Zunar, Eric Paulsen and S. Arutchelvan reflected how severe charges were dropped soon after the change of a government in Malaysia. Similar sedition-linked charges launched against Vice President Leni Robredo and officials of the opposition Liberal Party in the Philippines soon after the 2019 general elections also appeared to have been undertaken for political reasons, targeting not only the party, but also members of the clergy and lawyers who had expressed dissent against the conduct of President Duterte. Meanwhile, the case of Jakarta Globe, Okezone and Harian Bangsa showed a spuriousness in decision-making when the police in Indonesia were able to drop alleged defamation charges very quickly after they were brought against the news outlets and its journalists. In Thailand, lesè majesté and sedition cases were tried in military courts as they purportedly related to “national security” only after the military-led government came into power; while in Cambodia, the coming into force of the inter-ministerial prakas just before the 2018 elections and the shutdown afterwards of news websites days before the elections reflected the fact that the government had brought the law into force to censor independent reporting surrounding the elections. In Malaysia, the Sarawak Report was similarly blocked through the CMA by a government seeking to contain spread of information regarding the 1MDB scandal when that information was most necessary in the public interest of the Malaysian people. “National security” and “public order” have also been used as pretextual justifications for full or partial shutdowns of the internet in Myanmar, Philippines, Vietnam and Indonesia – often without providing any legal basis at all. This impedes a range of rights, including freedoms of expression, assembly and association, and the rights to information, education, health and work. While there are real security concerns relating to the spread of disinformation, hate speech and incitement to violence, governments have 145