A/HRC/42/CRP.5 and Tatmadaw conflict and reporting on the situation of the Rohingya in Rakhine. They also prevented civil society, victims and witnesses of human rights violations and abuses communicating their concerns to the outside world. They hampered the ability of humanitarian agencies to evaluate the humanitarian conditions and needs of people affected by the conflict and others in the region. The shutdown also made it difficult for the government and other actors to disseminate information to communities in conflict areas, including information about clashes, which could be vital for the safety and protection of the civilian population. 445. The Mission is also concerned about reports of restrictions on freedom of assembly in Rakhine State. In response to protests connected to deaths in custody and allegations of torture against Rakhine detained on charges of belonging to AA, ethnic Rakhine protesters have been sought after by police, with charges reportedly being laid against them. 1033 1. Freedom of expression, and crack-down on local media 446. The media in Myanmar have traditionally faced heavy restrictions and censorship. These restrictions lessened during the period from 2012 to 2015. However, there was a marked increase in restrictions on the media in Rakhine State after the “clearance operations” of October 2016 against the Rohingya.1034 Following the 2017 “clearance operations”, media access, in particular to the northern Rakhine Townships, remained restricted to visits organised well in advance, orchestrated by the Government and under Government control.1035 447. These restrictions have not abated. To the contrary, following the escalation of hostilities between the AA and the Tatmadaw in early 2019, the Government has barred journalists from reporting from conflict affected areas in Rakhine. Journalists are only able to access those areas in visits organized by the Ministry of Information.1036 448. Hostility and intolerance towards local media reporting on the conflict have increased in 2019. In April and May 2019, editors and publishers of three Myanmar publications that published articles on the Tatmadaw’s conflict with the AA were charged with criminal offenses. 449. One case involved editors of “The Irrawaddy”1037 who were charged with “online defamation” under section 66(d) of the 2013 Telecommunications Law. 1038 If found guilty, the accused face up to two years in prison.1039 450. A second case involved charges against the editors of Radio Free Asia (RFA) that were similarly filed under section 66(d) of the 2013 Telecommunications Law in April 2019. The charges have reportedly been dropped.1040 A third case involved charges against Aung Marm Oo, the editor of the Development Media Group. In early May 2019, Aung 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 126 The Irrawaddy, “‘Rakhine Life Matters’ Protesters Sought by Police in Sittwe” (4 July 2019); DVB, "Police Force investigated the home of one of the Rakhine youth who asked for justice", (3 July 2019): http://burmese.dvb.no/archives/335399. Joe Freeman, “Myanmar Journalists Grapple With Lack of Access, Legal Fears” (VOA News, 6 July 2017). LM-019, LM-022, Radio Free Asia, “Myanmar Keeps Media Away From Rakhine Conflict Zone” (5 November 2019) FFFGEN-1555826851-1890. See also for example: Jonathan Head, “Rohingya crisis: Villages destroyed for government facilities” (BBC, 10 September 2019). LI-183, LI-188, The Irrawaddy, “Military sues the Irrawaddy for ‘Unfair’ Coverage of Rakhine Conflict” (22 April 2019), International Federation of Journalists, “Myanmar: The Irrawaddy targeted under draconian Article 66(d)” (Press Release, 23 April 2019), Committee to Protect Journalists, “Myanmar military sues The Irrawaddy for criminal defamation over conflict coverage” (25 April 2019). LI-183, LI-188. s.66(d) of the 2013 Telecommunications Law Htet Naing Zaw, “Press Council Requests Role in Case Against Journalists” (The Irrawaddy, 26 June 2019) http://myanmarpresscouncil.org/activities-mpc/statements-mpc/333-statements8-3my19.html