circulating information which may cause public fear or alarm, and which may incite people to commit offences “against the State or against the public tranquillity”. 264 The 2004 Electronic Transactions Law (the ETL) creates a range of offences for online content that are much broader than in the criminal code. 265 In addition, the law does not provide safeguards for the right to freedom of expression. Under Article 33 of the ETL, it is a criminal offence to do any act or to receive, send or distribute any information detrimental to a wide range of broadly defined interests: the security of the state, the prevalence of law and order or community peace and tranquillity, national solidarity, the national economy or national culture that go far beyond permitted restrictions to the freedom of expression under international law. These same provisions are replicated in the Computer Sciences Development Law. See Chapter 2 for more details. Laws Enacted Since the 2011 Reform Process The Media Law and the Printing and Publishing Law, both of which apply to print and Internet publications, were passed in March 2014. The vague provisions of the 2014 Printing and Publishing Law and broad powers of a Government Registrar to grant or revoke publishing licenses, led to fears of press self-censorship. 266 However the 2014 Printing and Publishing Law still represents a step forward compared to the repealed 1962 Printers and Publishers Law, which provided for wide censorship powers and imprisonment for operating without registration. Article 8 on content restrictions is broadly worded; for example, although the restriction on “public order” is a recognised legitimate objective under international human rights law to justify restrictions on freedom of expression, the law should be much more specific as to what types of statements are being prohibited. 267 Articles 3 and 4 of the 2014 Media Law guarantee respectively freedom from censorship and freedom to criticise the Government, but both must comply with the constitution (Article 3(a)), which itself has significant restrictions on freedom of expression. The 2014 Media Law grants a media council, which is not independent from the Government, unrestricted control to regulate broadcast, print and Internet-based media, including on ethics. 268 However these laws have not – yet – been applied to prosecute users of Internet services such as social networking. 264 Amnesty International “Activist organization targeted again” (6 November 2014). Article 19, “Background Paper on Freedom of Expression in Myanmar” (2014), pg. 47. 266 The Irrawaddy, “Burma Clampdown Gathers Pace as Legislation Passed” (17 March 2014). 267 Article 19 “Myanmar: Printing and Publishing Law, Legal Analysis” (November 2014). See also PEN International, PEN Myanmar, PEN Norway, PEN American Center and MIDO “Contribution to the 23rd session of the Working Group of the Universal Periodic Review. Submission on the Republic of the Union of Myanmar“ (23 March 2015). 268 Article 19 “Myanmar: News Media Law, Legal Analysis” (July 2014) and an unofficial translation of the Media Law. 265 CHAPTER 4.1: FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION 133 4 4.1