A/HRC/34/67 (2011), but notes that criminal sanctions have been retained. She hopes those shortcomings can be addressed. 6. The Special Rapporteur notes the decision to draft a citizens private security and protection law. Potential issues include vague provisions on defamation. While the current draft provides for surveillance with a “warrant in accordance with law”, there is currently no such law. She recommends that a legal framework for surveillance be drawn up, in accordance with international standards and in consultation with experts. 7. As the Special Rapporteur has previously highlighted, a strong law on violence against women is urgently needed to address weaknesses in the existing legislative framework. She is concerned by information that the most recent draft of the law on prevention and protection of violence against women has removed key provisions, including those relating to the definition of rape, a special court for gender-based violence, sexual violence in conflict, violence by public officials, and capacity-building for the Attorney-General’s Office and the Supreme Court. She calls for those provisions to be reinstated and the law passed immediately. 8. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the provisions in the draft child rights law that increase the compliance of Myanmar with its international obligations. She understands the draft law is likely to be submitted to the parliament in the near future and underlines the importance of retaining key provisions on preventing child recruitment into the armed forces and the minimum age of criminal responsibility. 9. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the decision taken by the Ministry of Home Affairs to begin working on an entirely new text of the draft prison law and hopes it will be in line with relevant international standards and drafted in cooperation with stakeholders. She encourages the Ministry to seek technical assistance in that area. 10. The Special Rapporteur remains concerned about the four laws of the so-called protection of race and religion package adopted in 2015 (see A/HRC/28/72, paras. 28-29). She therefore welcomes comments from parliamentarian Mya Thaung, recognizing that those laws need to be reconciled with the draft law on prevention and protection of violence against women. The Special Rapporteur reiterates that those laws are not in accordance with the international obligations of Myanmar and urges it to rectify their shortcomings. 11. The Special Rapporteur acknowledges the Government’s decision to draft a hate speech law that should address incitement to discrimination and violence, while protecting freedom of speech. However, she is concerned that the draft has not yet been open for public consultation, and that several proposed provisions are not in accordance with international standards. She calls for meaningful consultations and revisions to the text to address that, reiterating as a helpful reference the Rabat Plan of Action on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. 12. The Special Rapporteur and her predecessors have previously highlighted that the Citizenship Law (1982) is not in line with international standards (see A/69/398, paras. 12 and 53, and A/HRC/25/64, paras. 49 and 83 (f)), particularly regarding discriminatory provisions for granting of citizenship on the basis of ethnicity or race. On 27 December 2016, the State Counsellor’s Office issued a notification detailing the legal basis for, and objective of, the identity card for national verification, a document that is a prerequisite for applying for citizenship if the applicant no longer holds an identity card. While the identity cards for national verification are issued in accordance with the 1949 Registration of Residents Act (and related 1951 rules), the rights accorded to identity card-holders differ from those for persons holding National Registration Cards (three-folded cards) issued under the same Act. 13. In addition to clearly articulating that the identity card for national verification is issued only for the purposes of scrutinizing the eligibility of the holder for citizenship (in accordance with the 1982 Citizenship Law), the notification specifically stated that: (a) card-holders can travel anywhere inside the country in accordance with the regional laws, orders and instructions of their respective state government; (b) card-holders from Rakhine State can travel freely in their resident township and inside Rakhine State in accordance 3