ASEAN Regional Coalition to #StopDigitalDictatorship were each unlawfully amended by the military. These years.8 Under Section 46 of the Anti-Corruption Law, legislations were used during Myanmar’s attempted on the other hand, an informer or complainant can be transition to democracy to justify the arbitrary punished if they “give[] the information or complaint imprisonment of journalists, human rights defenders, intentionally for the purpose of any person aggrieved students and many other civilians for acts ranging or to be defamed without credible evidence.”9 Similarly, from criticising the government to reporting on the Section 9(g) of the 2014 News Media Law makes it 2017 attacks of genocide against Rohingya, and the a crime to write news that “deliberately affects the waves of state-sponsored violence leading up to it. reputation of a person or organisation or that disrespects Since the coup, the State Administration Council their human rights, unless the writing is in the public (SAC)–the military junta–has unlawfully amended a interest,” which is essentially tantamount to a broadly few laws without parliamentary approval, and made formulated crime of defamation. The provision carries worse a draft Cyber Security Law, which would further a fine of up to MMK 1 million ($476).10 Similarly, Section expand the grounds on which online freedom could 8(f) of the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of be curbed. Citizens (Privacy Law) states that “no one shall act in 4 5 Criminalisation of Defamation: the Penal Code, 2013 Telecommunications Law, Anti-Corruption Law, the 2014 News Media Law, and the Privacy Law Sections 499-502 of the Penal Code punishes defamation by a maximum of two years’ imprisonment or a fine or both. It is the only law that defines defamation and provides potential defences against it. Nevertheless, these defences are weak, limited in scope and fall short of the international standards.6 A criminal defamation any way to slander or harm [a citizen’s] reputation.”. Violators can be sentenced to between six months and three years and fined between MMK 300,000 ($142) and 1.5 million ($714).11 In a nutshell, these articles lack precision and impose disproportionate criminal sanctions, contrary to the right to freedom of expression. Sedition Law and New Loosely Defined Provision in the Penal Code to Muzzle Critics clause is also found in the 2013 Telecommunications Section 124(a) of the Penal Code criminalises sedition, Law. Section 66(d) of the Law criminalises the defined as behaviour that brings “or attempts to bring “extorting, defaming, disturbing or threatening [of] any into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to person by using any telecommunications network.” excite disaffection” against the “government.” The Violators could be imprisoned for up to two years, provision was unlawfully expanded by the military in fined or both. Although it contains a range of grounds the 2021 amendments to include comments relating to for prosecution, defamation is the one that has been its defence services and defence services personnel. used most frequently, especially when it involves the Violations are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. use of a telecommunications device. The provision Moreover, Sections 295(a) and 153(a) punish with up does not define what constitutes defamation or to two years’ imprisonment the acts of “outraging outline any defences. religious feelings” and promoting feelings of enmity 7 Likewise, Section 34(d) of the ETL criminalises the “creat[ion], modif[ication] or alter[ation] of information or distributing of information created, modified or altered by electronic technology to be detrimental to the interest of or to lower the dignity of any organisation or any person,” and carries a prison term of three 182 or hatred between groups of people respectively. A provision newly introduced in 2021 by the military, Section 505A, expands the scope of its previous version by criminalising expression that “cause[s] fear,” spreads “false news, [or] agitates directly or indirectly a criminal offence against a Government employee” and punishing it with a maximum of three Dawn of Digital Dictatorship: Weaponizing the Law Against Online Speech in Southeast Asia