Table 4. Penalties for defamation Country Offline penalties Online penalties Cambodia Article 305, Cambodian Criminal Code: Defamation shall be punishable by a fine from one hundred thousand to ten million Riels if it is committed by any of the following means: (1) any words whatsoever uttered in a public place or in a public meeting; (2) written documents or pictures of any type released or displayed to the public; (3) any audio-visual communication intended for the public. Same as for offline offence India Section 500, Indian Penal Code: Simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. Same as for offline offence. Malaysia Section 500, Malaysian Penal Code: Imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both. Section 233, Communications and Multimedia Act, 1998: Shall be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or to both and shall also be liable to a further fine of one thousand ringgit for every day during which the offence is continued after conviction. Myanmar Section 500, Myanmar Penal Code: Simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. Section 66(d), Telecommunications Law: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to a fine or to both Pakistan Section 500, Pakistan Penal Code: Imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. Section 18, Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016:* Imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine which may extend to one million rupees or with both. Thailand Article 326, Thai Penal Code: Imprisonment not exceeding one year or fined not exceeding twenty thousand Baht, or both. Section 14(1), Computer-related Crimes Act, 2007: Imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of not more than one hundred thousand baht or both. * Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016. Section 18. "Offences against the dignity of a natural person. (1) Whoever intentionally and publicly exhibits or displays or transmits any information through any information system, which he knows to be false, and intimidates or harms the reputation or privacy of a natural person [...]." www.na.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1470910659_707.pdf Conclusion As APC’s joint written statement to the Human Rights Council at its 35th session23 notes, states in Asia are moving towards repressive regimes where online freedoms are concerned. Although freedom of expression is guaranteed in the constitutions of Asian states, including the six that are part of this report, states liberally use legal justifications to curtail and also to criminalise online speech. Some states, such as Cambodia, also use informal means 23 Association for Progressive Communications. (2017). Joint written statement submitted by Association for Progressive Communications (APC), non-governmental organizations in general consultative status. https://www.apc.org/sites/default/ files/2570_A_HRC_35_NGO_Sub_En.pdf to repress freedoms, and create high-profile cases to serve as deterrents against political expression and opposition. Not only political expression, but artistic expression also suffers in the first instance. In states like India, laws on obscenity affect educational and artistic expression in practice. Although the law may say otherwise, the very fact of arrest and charging for the offence itself constitutes harassment and punishment. Furthermore, expressions of wit and humour that touch upon religion are affected in states like Pakistan and Malaysia, where laws on blasphemy and outraging religious feelings severely restrict the scope of expression. The following reports show the state of online freedom of expression in their respective countries. 32 / Unshackling Expression