Myanmar: Digital Content Regulation symbols, are not regarded as legitimate.31 Reflecting this, the 2011 General Comment by the UN Human Rights Committee states: Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant.32 The rules in the Penal Code on Offences Relating to Religion, including the two provisions cited above, fail to conform to these standards. They protect feelings as opposed to protecting individuals against discrimination, violence or hatred. In addition, they protect religious beliefs, as such, as opposed to the people who hold those beliefs. Recommendation: Ø Chapter XV of the Penal Code should be revised to bring it into line with the standards noted above, in particular so that it only limits speech to protect religious believers against discrimination, violence and hatred. In particular, sections 295A and 298 should be repealed. 8. Conclusion Developing a legislative framework to regulate online speech is a tricky and delicate endeavour that is only rendered more challenging by the complexity, technical sophistication and rapidly evolving nature of digital technologies. These challenges mean that legislative drafting and reform efforts need to be sure to engage with civil society and to make sure that the concerns of all stakeholders are taken into account in order to avoid clumsy or technically ineffective rules, as well as laws which prohibit innocuous or benign digital behaviours alongside harmful ones. Engagement with legal and technical experts who possess the expertise and skill sets that lawmakers often lack, or who may offer insights and perspectives that are otherwise absent, is therefore of paramount importance. A range of civil society players in Myanmar, including the legal organisation, Myanmar Media Lawyers’ Network (MMLN), can play a key role in this regard by helping to ensure that laws limiting digital content respect international and constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression. This report highlights some of the more problematical provisions in various Myanmar laws, including the Electronic Transactions Law, Official Secrets Act, Telecommunications Law, News Media Law and Penal Code. It is now up to policy makers and the Myanmar authorities to ensure that these laws are Centre For Law and Democracy and International Media Support, Briefing Note Series: Freedom of Expression (2014), p. 36. Available at: http://www.law-democracy.org/live/wpcontent/uploads/2012/08/Briefing-notes.full-version.Eng_.pdf. 32 General Comment No. 34, 12 September 2011, CCPR/C/GC/34, para. 48. 31 - 20 -