Previous 19 / 43 Next

Freedom of Expression During Myanmar’s Revolution: The Gap Between Legal Provisions and Practice “Security means both for the journalists and the public. These concerns have affected the freedom to report news; you can’t include everything you know. There are certain parts that can’t be fully disclosed, and there are constraints”11 said a member of the Independent Myanmar Press Council in an interview for this study. In addition, conditions on the ground indicate that even local authorities do not impose any restrictions on freedom of expression; people engage in self-censorship due to social pressure and security concerns. For example, in liberated areas, being perceived as a ‘military informant’ can result in severe consequences, ranging from social punishment to threats to life, beyond any formal judicial process. This concern was highlighted by a journalism trainer who participated in the research interviews. “In my view, the most serious threat arises when someone is accused of informing the enemy. In everyday terms, this is described as being ‘an informant’, someone alleged to have shared locations, reported activities, or disclosed what is happening in a particular place. For example, when an incident occurs, and a person speaks to journalists, or reports it to an individual or an organisation that does not exercise control in that area, they may be accused of providing information to the enemy. In such situations, the risk of being labelled an informant is extremely high and poses a serious danger,”12 he said. As a result, some journalists and members of the public often choose silence, even when they witness misconduct by revolutionary forces, out of fear of being labelled an “informant”. While such situations do not constitute direct legal restrictions on freedom of expression, they can nonetheless be understood as factors that substantially weaken its practical exercise. 5.1.5 Analysis In summary, the Federal Democracy Charter recognizes freedom of expression as part of the broader body of human rights, and generally states that it will follow the 11 12 A member of Independent Myanmar Press Council who participated in the research interview A journalism trainer 17

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Freedom of Expression During Myanmar’s Revolution : The Gap Between Legal Provisions and Practice

Report

Preview

Language

Burmese
English

Topic

Information Operation
Military Coup

Author(s)

Athan

Date Published: Feb 17, 2026

Abstract: he military coup of 1 February 2021 marked a major turning point in Myanmar’s political and legal history. The military’s seizure of power constituted a blatant violation of Articles 417 and 4181 of the 2008 Constitution, which was in force at the time, with those entrusted with safeguarding the law instead breaching it. Consequently, on 31 March 2021, the Committee Representing the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (CRPH)2 formally declared the complete abolition of the 2008 Constitution through Announcement No. 2/2021.

This decision also legally invalidated the military regime’s narrative that the 2021 coup was carried out in accordance with the Constitution. However, it simultaneously created a constitutional vacuum at the national level, leaving Myanmar without a governing constitution. To prevent the collapse of the rule of law and administrative mechanisms, and to establish the legal legitimacy of the revolution, it became urgently necessary to fill this vacuum.

In response to this need, revolutionary forces that emerged following the military coup issued the Federal Democracy Charter (FDC) on 31 March 2021. The Charter assumed the character of an interim constitutional framework, replacing the 2008 Constitution and serving as the highest legal framework during the revolutionary period. From 2023 onwards, revolutionary territories across Myanmar also began drafting and promulgating their own interim political arrangements. These developments began with the Interim Arrangements for Karenni State, followed by the Chinland Constitution, the Sagaing Federal Unit Interim Constitution, and the Mandalay Region Interim Political Plan, respectively.

These interim constitutional frameworks not only filled the legal gap left by the abolition of the 2008 Constitution, but also served as a foundational basis for establishing the legitimacy of the revolutionary forces and for building a future federal state. In particular, they function as a social contract between those who govern and those who are governed, aimed at protecting citizens’ rights.

Douglass C. North, a Nobel Prize–winning institutional economist, argues in his institutional theory3 that the principles applied in establishing a state’s foundational institutions play a decisive role in shaping its future political order. Accordingly, it becomes essential to examine how freedom of expression—one of the fundamental requirements of a democratic system—is incorporated into these foundational frameworks and the extent to which it is guaranteed, as they can serve as the critical veins of future federal units.

This study is a comparative analysis of how freedom of expression is placed in the Federal Democracy Charter and the interim legal frameworks enacted by three key revolutionary areas—Karenni State, Sagaing Region, and Mandalay Region—that emerged following the collapse of the 2008 Constitution. It comparatively examines how freedom of expression is addressed in papers and how it is practiced on the ground. This study furthermore identifies gaps between legal provisions and practical implementation, security-based restrictions, and self-censorship among the public.

Link: source

Primary Documents

FoE-During-Myanmars-Revolution_Athan_Feb-2026_ENG-1.pdf
English
Download View
FoE-During-Myanmars-Revolution_Athan_Feb-2026_MMR-1.pdf
Burmese
Download View

Myanmar Internet Project

Select target paragraph3

Freedom of Expression During Myanmar’s Revolution : The Gap Between Legal Provisions and Practice

Primary Documents

Notifications