Introduction From the start of the February 2021 coup d’état, the Myanmar military tried to control an information ecosystem dominated by an anti-coup, anti-military, and pro-democratic narrative. At the core of this dissenting information ecosystem was Myanmar’s independent media, a new generation of journalists accustomed to media freedom, and a public hooked on accessing truthful, diverse, and timely information, all facilitated by access to the internet. The military’s response was predictable, fluctuating between viciously savage and judicially punitive. Many media outlets were banned, their journalists detained, charged, and sentenced by sham courts to long terms of imprisonment under oppressive laws. Violence and torture were rife. The military ignored its substantive international and domestic obligations to respect the rights to freedom of expression and association, as well as other human rights.1 Serious concerns were expressed at the highest levels of the international community.2 However, analysis beyond the number of journalists involved was scant and diminished as the coup dragged on and civil society resources declined.3 The purpose of this report is to establish a situational analysis on the deprivation of journalists’ liberty three years into the coup, based on cross-corroboration of civil society monitoring efforts and complemented by an analysis of the legal cases. The first part of the report examines journalists’ legal cases during the period under review (February 2021 to February 2025). The second part disaggregates the situation for women journalists, and the third part outlines the resulting impact on media outlets. The annex includes an analysis of Myanmar’s modern history of media regulation and the related criminal law framework. ‘‘ The purpose of this report is to establish a situational analysis on the deprivation of journalists’ liberty four years into the coup, based on crosscorroboration of civil society monitoring efforts and complemented by an analysis of the legal cases. 1 Myanmar was not a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the International Convention Against Torture, but was a State Party to the Geneva Conventions and member of the United Nations with its Universal Declaration of Human Rights, some of which has become binding as international customary law. International standards relating to the right to freedom of expression were clarified in: United Nations Human Rights Committee (2011), “General Comment No. 34”. Paragraph 7 stated that it applied to all parts of the State. 2 United Nations Security Council (2022), “Resolution 2669”. 3 For example, Reporting Asean published data until it closed its program. 3