Myanmar: News Media and Printing and Publishing Enterprises Law Reforms corruption and after obtaining permission from the editor. This is an exception to the general rule under the Law, which requires the disclosure of one’s name. Section 7 protects the rights of media workers, in the context of war, riot and public demonstration, to be exempt from arrest or seizure and destruction of their devices, as well as the right to ask for protection from security organisations. Rule 31 further specifies that in battle, riot or protest zones, media personal can show a media identification card to the security organisation in that area, in which case they may collect news in that location, as long as they follow the rules for news gathering. Section 4(d) of the NML protects the right to information for media workers, as well as the right to access government entities (in accordance with relevant terms and conditions), while section 6 recognises the right to request and view non-classified information. This is further elaborated in Rules 29 and 30, which set timeframes for responding to requests and provide a limited procedure for refusing requests (including the possibility of lodging a complaint with the MPC). These provisions are valuable, given that no general right to information law has so far been adopted in Myanmar, although they do not replace the need for a proper right to information regime. Printing and Publishing Enterprises Law Unlike the NML, the PPEL does not generally affirm or create any rights for those producing the publications it regulates. The one exception to this is sections 12 and 13, which provide that certified publishing enterprises and news agencies have the right to distribute information via the Internet. Given that this is in the chapter on export and import restrictions (discussed further below), it may have been included simply to clarify that online content is not subject to the export and import requirements that otherwise govern printed publications. Recommended Integration and Reform Neither the NML nor the PPEL explicitly recognise, as an objective or as a right, freedom of expression, including freedom of the media, and this gap should be addressed in an amended law. In addition, language affirming the importance of an independent media sector should be reflected in the objectives of the law. While these concepts are somehow already present in both laws, a clearly articulated affirmation of these rights would provide an important principle governing the interpretation of the law. In addition, an amended law should take the approach of the NML and incorporate dedicated provisions which establish or affirm the rights of media workers. A new law should, however, go beyond what is already reflected in section 4 of the NML. First, the law should explicitly protect editorial independence. This is the right of media entities to make their own decisions on what to report on and publish, without external interference. At one level, this would underscore Myanmar’s transition away from a system of prior censorship, while leaving the media, like anyone else, open to post-publication challenges, including in the form of lawsuits. But it would also highlight the need for The Centre for Law and Democracy is a non-profit human rights organisation working internationally to provide legal expertise on foundational rights for democracy -6-