Freedom of Expression During Myanmar’s Revolution: The Gap Between Legal Provisions and Practice active consultation. As a result, important safeguards for freedom of expression and media freedom were not incorporated into the draft. 6.4. Reasons for Limited Participation and Structural Constraints The inability of some stakeholders to participate in drafting the interim arrangements and the constitutional framework was not deliberate; it was also shaped by structural and on-the-ground constraints arising from the context of revolution. The initial drafting of these constitutional frameworks occurred while armed confrontation was ongoing on the ground. Due to the military’s targeted airstrikes against civilians and ground offensives, it was not possible to conduct broad public consultations or mass gatherings. As a result, policy drafters often relied on small, discreet, closed-group discussions, which constrained wider participation. This limitation was also highlighted by a journalism trainer who participated in the research interviews. He said, “There was no environment in which individuals or organisations could freely communicate with one another during the revolutionary period. Security was prioritised. For example, there were concerns that information might be leaked to the military; questions such as what someone was currently doing, whether they were in Thailand, at the border, or inside the country, were often unclear. In such uncertain circumstances, people did not dare approach, contact, or engage others. That situation is also understandable.”46 Revolutionary forces responsible for drafting the interim arrangements were required to build both military and administrative structures simultaneously. As a result, there were limitations in legislative expertise and in the time available for drafting. Due to these constraints, policy documents often included terms such as 'international 46 An expert on media affairs who participated in the interview 36