Executive Summary: "Myanmar?s Union Parliament has evolved into a significant political institution of the regime shaped after the 2010 general elections. First under the leadership of the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP, 2011-2016), and then the National League for Democracy (NLD) after its victory in the 2015 polls, the bicameral assembly has begun modifying, repealing, and producing new legislation. It has taken nascent but significant steps towards the vetting and scrutiny of the new, post-junta executive branch and bureaucracy. It has also served as a new public space where the grievances of citizens are heard and new ideas debated in ways unthinkable under Myanmar?s past military rules. It may prove a unique case amongst other post-authoritarian societies attempting to revive parliamentarianism. These outstanding developments do not, however, mean that Myanmar?s progress towards the institutionalization of its new legislative power will be steady and successful beyond the initial post-junta legislatures. Given that Parliament was only revised in 2011, there are several areas where reform and restructuring are needed to improve the long-term effectiveness, efficiency, representativeness, and autonomy of not only the legislative process, but also the fragile parliamentary institution itself. This report presents an assessment of the structural organization, workings, and legislative performance of the Union Parliament since 2011. It first describes the constitutional, organizational, and legal framework of Myanmar?s new, post-junta legislative process. It also offers a comparative examination of the sociological profile of the two legislatures elected in 2010 and 2015. It then analyzes the various parliamentary practices and mechanisms observed in the context of both the USDP and the early NLD legislatures. Drawing on interviews carried out in Nay Pyi Taw, the study focuses on the core functions a democratic legislature is meant to perform: the (re)making of laws, the representation of citizens, and the scrutiny of government activities and expenditures. The report argues that Myanmar?s Union Parliament has fallen into the category of a nascent, marginal legislature, with the willingness and capacity to influence, rather than command, policy and lawmaking, and a potential for vetting, rather than thoroughly overseeing, the activities and behaviors of other branches of government. With the assistance of domestic and international donors, there have been remarkable attempts in its six years of existence to institutionalize and professionalize the functioning of the legislature and the capacity of its members and staff. Nevertheless, the report points to several key weaknesses, including the lack of sufficient resources, efficient organizational capacity, knowledge, and understanding of oversight and vetting mechanisms and a fragile institutional autonomy. The report concludes with a series of recommendations for enhancing the role, functioning, representativeness, and influence of the Union legislature so as to strengthen a body that is essential for the deepening of democratization in Myanmar..."