Amnesty International’s research indicates that judges rarely grant bail to individuals facing charges under Section 505(b). As a result, using this provision essentially allows the authorities to keep activists off the streets for the duration of their trial. For example, five students, all members of the Confederation of University Student Unions (CUSU), Paing Ye Htut, Zayar Lwin, Nan Linn, Min Thu Kyaw and Ye Zarni Tun, peacefully protested on 30 June 2015 in Yangon to call for the resignation of military members of parliament, who comprise 25% of the seats in Myanmar’s legislature. Following the protest they were all charged with breaching the terms under which permission to protest was granted, under Section 19 of the Peaceful Assembly Act. However, Paing Ye Htut, Zayar Lwin and Nan Linn, who had apparently organized the protest and who gave speeches at the event were additionally charged with “incitement” under Section 505(b), allowing the authorities to detain them immediately. The three are now currently held at Insein prison while their trial is ongoing at the Kyauktada and Pabedan Township Courts. Amnesty International’s research indicates that leaders of protests and organizations or movements are particularly likely to be charged under Section 505(b) (See Section on the targeting of leaders below). While Section 505(b) is the most commonly used non-bailable offence, Amnesty International is also concerned that other repressive laws which feature in politically motivated cases, such as Section 295(a) of the Penal Code (religious defamation) and Article 66(d) of the 2013 Telecommunications Act (defamation over a telecommunications network), are also classed as non-bailable offences and thus can be used to keep activists in detention prior to and during their trial. 3.2 THE WEAKENING OF ORGANIZATIONS AND MOVEMENTS The Myanmar authorities have been using politically motivated detention and imprisonment in a way that significantly weakens dissident movements and human rights activities, targeting their leaders in particular. Trials of these leaders can take many months, disrupting their organizations’ activities. In some cases, the authorities seem to be using politically motivated charges to target entire groups of individuals, in ways which severely curtail, and may even put an end to, their activities. TARGETING LEADERS “The police asked lots of questions. They kept on asking ‘Who organized the protest? Who is mobilising the people? They showed me photos of Myo Min Min and Naing Htay Lwin [trade union leaders] and asked if they were behind the protest…Now we have no more plans to protest - our leaders are in prison, and some of the workers were fired after the protests…people are afraid to take action.” A factory worker tells Amnesty International what happened when police questioned him about strikes and labour protests at the Shwe Pyi Thar industrial zone, in Yangon in early 2015.43 Amnesty International’s research indicates that leaders of movements or organizations are particularly at risk of arrest on politically-motivated charges. In the cases examined by Amnesty International, the authorities appear to have singled out the leaders of protest movements and organizations critical of the government for arrest. Where many individuals were arrested and charged for a single event, for example a peaceful protest, the leaders were invariably charged with offences carrying longer prison sentences which would also not allow them to be granted bail. 43 Amnesty International interview, Yangon, June 2015. NEW EXPRESSION MEETS OLD REPRESSION ENDING THE CYCLE OF POLITICAL ARRESTS AND IMPRISONMENT IN MYANMAR Amnesty International 20