All sentences were fundamentally unnecessary and disproportionate. The following table shows a small proportion of sentences were up to two years imprisonment (6%), while more than half of sentences handed down to journalists were two to three years imprisonment (54%). A large minority of journalists were sentenced to four to nine years (17%), while others received extremely disproportionate sentences of 10 to 27 years imprisonment (23%). Some longer sentences were made up of multiple concurrent sentences3 Sentences Handed Down to Journalists 6% 54% 17% 23% Up to 2 years 2-3 years 4-9 years 10-27 years There was little difference in the sentences given based on the seniority of the journalist. The average sentence given to junior journalists was 5.2 years. Senior journalists and media leaders received an average of 5 and 4.9 years respectively. There was no clear link between where the journalist worked and the length of the sentence handed down. A significant but unverified proportion of the sentences were enhanced or aggravated custodial sentences that included “rigorous” imprisonment provided for under Penal Code (1861) Article 53. Rigorous imprisonment or “imprisonment with hard labor” involves a far harsher form of punishment than Myanmar’s general prison labor camps.40 Sentencing a journalist to rigorous imprisonment violates labor rights under international law and potentially constitutes a war crime.41 ‘‘ The 88 convicted journalists were sentenced to a combined total of 497 years’ imprisonment, an average of 5.7 years each. Almost all of the sentences handed down were imprisonment (92%) and most applied the maximum sentence allowable under the law. 40 Rigorous imprisonment was commonly used by Myanmar’s previous military administration, which forced prisoners including journalists to do construction, manufacturing, and military work under horrendous conditions. It was rarely if ever handed down to journalists or enforced during the transitional period. Myanmar Now (2023), “Myanmar regime reviving practice of forcing political prisoners to do hard labour”. 41 International Labour Organization (2023), “Towards freedom and dignity in Myanmar”. See also: International Committee of the Red Cross (2005) “Practice relating to Règle 95”. Assessing Detentions of Journalists in Myanmar, Feb. 2021 to Feb. 2025 14