Despite the guarantee of this right, the government reserves the right to restrict freedom of expression on grounds of “Union security, prevalence of law and order, community peace and tranquility or public order and morality.”10 These restrictions (including the creation of criminal offences) have been exercised through the use of laws, such as the Myanmar Penal Code, the Computer Science Development Law, Electronic Transactions Law, Tele­communications Law, etc. The Myanmar Penal Code, like that of India, is a colonial legislation. Enacted in 1860, it includes offences relating to obscenity, outraging religious feelings, and defamation, among others. While the Penal Code makes no mention of the internet, there is nothing to suggest that the Penal Code cannot be used to target online speech. However, it is the Electronic Transactions Law and the Telecommunications Law that have been most commonly used against online speech in Myanmar. Section 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law criminalises “[e]xtorting, coercing, restraining wrongfully, defaming, disturbing, causing undue influence or threatening to any person by using any Telecommunications Network.”11 The Electronic Transactions Law, for its part, criminalises any act that is “detrimental to the security of the State or prevalence of law and order or community peace and tranquillity or national solidarity or national economy or national culture,” for which the punishment is a jail term of five to seven years.12 Myanmar does, in fact, utilise these provisions to criminalise online speech; as the Myanmar report notes, there have been over 73 cases in the span of one year alone. Pakistan In Pakistan, the distrust of electronic media and the internet is glaringly obvious. As the Pakistan report shows, the state authorities have made it clear that social media has a detrimental influence on the cultural and religious values of the country, and that they intend to crack down on such influences. Towards this end, Pakistan employs a structured network of laws to criminalise and, more broadly, restrict freedom of speech and expression. Pakistan guarantees freedom of speech and expression through Article 19 of its constitution.13 The 10 Ibid. 11 Telecommunications Law. Section 66(d). www.burmalibrary.org/ docs23/2013-10-08-Telecommunications_Law-en.pdf. 12 The Electronic Transactions Law. Section 33(a). www.burmalibrary. org/docs15/2004-SPDC_Law2004-05-Electronic_Transactions_ Law-en.pdf 13 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Article 19. https:// pakistanconstitutionlaw.com/article-19-freedom-of-speech-etc article also lays down the grounds on which the right can be restricted: “the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, [commission of ] or incitement to an offence.” As the Pakistan report notes, these justifications have been enabled through laws in the country. The Pakistan Penal Code is one such law, which criminalises speech and expression, among other offences. Blasphemy is a major provision by way of which speech, including and particularly online speech, is criminalised in Pakistan. As the Pakistan report notes, there is a “well-developed body of case law focused on the online space” relating to blasphemy. On the ground of blasphemy, YouTube has been banned, bloggers have disappeared, and vigilante murders have occurred. The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016, is another legislation that is used to criminalise online expression in Pakistan. Several sections, detailing offences and in some cases, heavier penalties than for offline offences, address online speech and expression. These provisions include hate speech, blasphemy, defamation, etc. In addition to blasphemy, national security, contempt of court and sedition, among others, have been frequently used in Pakistan against online speech. A crucial divergence in Pakistan is the mob justice that is meted out against “offensive” religious speech, though we see similarities to this in India as well. Thailand Thailand’s constitution of 2017 guarantees the right to freedom of opinion and expression under Section 34. Section 34 reads: “A person shall enjoy the liberty to express opinions, make speeches, write, print, publicise and express by other means,” and expressly protects academic freedom. However, the right is not absolute, and may be curtailed on grounds of “maintaining the security of the State, protecting the rights or liberties of other persons, maintaining public order or good morals, or protecting the health of the people.”14 Following the military coup of 22 May 2014, Thailand has been ruled by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO). The NCPO controls expression in Thailand through a series of laws, including the Penal Code and the Head of NCPO Announcements. Lèse majesté is a crucial wing of the NCPO’s control 14. Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand. Section 34. www.constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/2017-05/ CONSTITUTION%2BOF%2BTHE%2BKINGDOM%2BO F%2BTHAILAND%2B%28B.E.%2B2560%2B%282017%29%29.pdf 24 / Unshackling Expression