Internet Censorship and Shutdown in Myanmar

Myanmar has been strictly enforcing the internet censorship and shutdown admits the spread of ‘Misinformation’ within its conflict areas. The Ministry of Transport and Communications ordered 4 telecos to block 207 websites including ethnic websites based in Rakhine and reporting the situation in the conflict area as well.

• On March 26 and 27, Myanmar Now (1) and Frontier (2) reported that all four telecom operators received the same directive on March 21 to block the websites. 

• On March 30, Telenor Myanmar (3) issued a statement announcing that it blocked access to  221 websites, following the Ministry of Transport and Communications’ directive. 

• On April 1, BNI (4) reported that Rakhine based news agencies Narinjara and Development Media Group (DMG) were no longer accessible on MPT and MyTel from March 23 and 24 respectively. BNI also reported that Karen News, a Karen based local news agency,  was no longer accessible on MPT from March 26. 

According to the civil society groups, Myanmar Government’s order to block these websites lacks an adequate legal basis and is in violation of international human rights law. In a joint press statement they raise the following points:

1. We are concerned that the government is taking advantage of the COVID-19 epidemic to censor legitimate information and curtail freedom of expression. 
2. We are further concerned that the blocking of the website does not comply with the three part test prescribed in article 19(3) of the ICCPR:  
   a)blocking must be clearly defined in the law;
   b) blocking must be for a legitimate aim;
   c) blocking must be necessary and proportionate to achieve that aim.

According to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Expression and Opinion, further clarified in its May 2011 report (A/HRC/17/27) that website blocking may only be justified in limited circumstances and in order to deal with content which is prohibited under international law, namely: i. child pornography, ii. incitement to commit genocide and iii. advocacy of racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. He also stated that decisions for such blocking must be made by a competent judicial authority or body which is independent from any political, commercial or other unwarranted influences and the decision, and made available to the public in a transparent and accessible manner. We are concerned that the government’s directives did not follow these conditions.