nine of these problematic laws. Journalists faced an average of 1.4 charges each, with most facing a single criminal charge (78%). A minority of journalists faced two to five charges (22%). One journalist faced seven criminal charges, all under one law, the Penal Code (1861), including offenses of causing hurt, causing hurt to obstruct an official in their duties, hurting on provocation, endangering others, wrongful restraint, and causing mischief by fire or explosion. It was unclear whether journalists faced multiple charges for one incident or for multiple incidents. Most charges fell under the military’s newly “amended” Penal Code (1861) Article 505A (62%).32 This broad, vague provision was “adopted” shortly after the coup started as an easy catch-all that could be used to criminalize almost any form of expression without the need to fulfil the requirements of prosecutions under other laws (see Annex I).33 Article 505A also has a maximum sentence of three years, longer than the two years included in some other provisions used against journalists before. Article 505A includes three sub-clauses on “causing fear”, “false news”, and “agitation” but it is unclear which was most used against journalists because court records are inaccessible and media reports are unspecific. A minority of journalists (11%) faced charges under 15 other Penal Code (1861) provisions including Article 124A, exciting disaffection against the government (2%), and Article 505(b), inciting public alarm (2%). A large minority of journalists were charged under eight special laws that similarly violated international guarantees for the rights to freedom of expression and association (27%). Some journalists faced charges under the Counter-Terrorism Law (2014), which included extremely punitive minimum and maximum sentences for so-called “persuasion” and “propaganda” (14%). Others faced charges under Myanmar’s digital laws (7%), including the Telecommunications Law (2013), which contained provisions disproportionately criminalizing “defamation” (5%).34 A few journalists were charged under the Unlawful Association Act (1908), which unnecessarily prohibited certain types of interaction, including providing funds, with banned or unregistered groups (3%). SEVERITY OF CHARGES The gravity of each of the military’s violations of the rights to freedom of expression and association is based on the severity of the charges laid down against journalists. The Penal Code (1861) and Counter-Terrorism Law (2014) include provisions with far more disproportionate sanctions than other provisions. For example, Article 124A of 32 Many media and civil society reports incorrectly attributed charges to the colonial-era Penal Code Article 505(a), rather than to the military’s newly “amended” Article 505A. Almost all charges were under subclauses of Article 505A. 33 Free Expression Myanmar (2022), “505A: Act of revenge”. 34 The vague and overly broad Article 66(d) includes “defamation” but most cases before the coup were concerned with insult. For more information, see: FEM (2017), “66(d): No real change”. 11