Description:
Executive summary:
In 2014, ARTICLE 19 analysed
the 2014 Printing and Publishing Law of Myanmar in the
light of international standards on freedom of expression.
The
Ministry of Information
unveiled
a
draft
of the
Law
in 2013,
in
a move that
took
observers by surprise.
Responsibility to
develop a
law to
replace
the 1962 Printers and Publishers Registration Law had
previously
been entrusted to the Interim Media Council.
The Law was adopted and signed by the
President in 2014.
The
Printing and Publishing Law
(the Law)
represents a step forward compared to the
draconian
1962 law. It no longer facilitates prior censorship, and the penalties imposable
under it are relatively modest. Oversight over the printing and publishing sector has been
partly transferred from the government to the courts.
At the same time,
it is questionable whether a specific law to regulate the printing and
publishing sector is needed at all.
ARTICLE 19 is not convinced that the
Printing and
Publishing Law will
contribute
to its stated goals of promoting freedom of expression and
supporting the development of a vibrant printing and publishing sector.
Its
primary effect is to
create a series of bureaucratic formalities with which
companies in the sector must comply,
such as registering
with the Ministry of Information
and sending it information
on imports and
exports of publications.
While these procedures are less problematic than those under the
1962 law, it is not clear why they
are
necessary.
Vague definitions of
what constitutes a ?printer,”
?publisher”
or
?news agency”
create
confusion as to whom the
Law
applies to, and similarly vague restrictions on the content of
publications risk having a chilling effect...
Summary of
key
recommendations:
•The
stated goal of the Law to ensure ?ethical” practices
and compliance with
?relevant laws”
should be dropped and replaced with
a more substantive guarantee for freedom of
the media
• The requirement to register should be abolished entirely.
If the requirement to register is
not abolished, the registration procedure should be amended and set out clearly within
the Law itself. Those whose
registration
has been suspended or cancelled should have the
right to
appeal to a court
• The content restrictions listed should be removed and dealt with using laws of general
application, such as the penal code. If they are not removed, they should be defined
more clearly and narrowly in line with international standards
•The requirement to notify import and export of publications should be abolished entirely.
Source/publisher:
Article 19
Date of Publication:
2014-11-11
Date of entry:
2014-12-30
Grouping:
- Individual Documents
Category:
Language:
English
Local URL:
Format:
pdf
Size:
113.93 KB