You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

August 1, 2025

Myanmar Cybersecurity Law Takes Effect

On July 30, 2025, Myanmar’s Cybersecurity Law No. 1/2025 came into effect with the State Administration Council’s issuance of Notification 113/2025. The law, which was enacted on January 1, 2025, aims to regulate various aspects of digital security and online activities.

Below are some key provisions, implications, and penalties under the Cybersecurity Law.

  • Extraterritorial penalties. The law contains an important provision that authorizes penalties against Myanmar citizens who are found guilty of violations, even if these occur outside the country’s borders.
  • VPN definition and regulation. Virtual private networks (VPNs) are defined by this law as specific systems that function as backup networks by using technological means in order to ensure the safety of linking networks to each other. This definition sets the framework for subsequent regulations and penalties associated with VPN usage. The law does not restrict individuals or entities from using VPNs; it regulates VPN service providers.
  • Penalties for unapproved VPN services. Establishing a VPN or providing VPN services without approval from the designated ministry (to be appointed later by the government) can result in significant penalties. For individuals, the punishment may be imprisonment for 1–6 months, a fine of MMK 1–10 million (approx. USD 476–4,760), or both, with the proceeds of the violation being confiscated. If the violator is a company or organization, the minimum fine will be MMK 10 million, and the proceeds will be confiscated.
  • Government oversight. The ministry designated by the government is authorized to investigate and take control of cybersecurity services and digital platform services for national defense and security purposes, or upon request from a government department or organization in accordance with respective laws.
  • Licensing requirements. The Cybersecurity Law introduces two types of licenses, valid for a period of 3–10 years, for (1) cybersecurity services and (2) digital platform providers. Digital platforms with over 100,000 users are required to apply for the latter license. Noncompliance with this requirement will be subject to a fine of at least MMK 100 million (approx. USD 47,600), and any proceeds resulting from the violation will be confiscated.
  • Penalties for unsolicited communications. Individuals who transmit unwanted and unsolicited messages, emails, or data via a network will be subject to imprisonment for 1–2 years, a fine of MMK 5–20 million (approx. USD 2,380–9,530), or both.
  • Penalties for cyber misuse. Engaging in cyber misuse—including the alteration, deletion, or sale of computer programs or data, as well as the unauthorized control and execution of computer systems, programs, or electronic data—will be subject to imprisonment from 6 months to 3 years, a fine of MMK 1–20 million (approx. USD 476–9,530), or both.
  • Penalties for online theft or mischief. Committing or inciting others to commit online theft or mischief using cyber resources will be subject to imprisonment for 2–7 years and the possibility of additional fines.
  • Penalties for unapproved online gambling. Operating an online gambling system without proper authorization may result in imprisonment for 6 months to 1 year, a fine of MMK 5–20 million (approx. USD 2,380–9,530), or both, with the proceeds from such activities being confiscated. If the offender is a corporation or organization, the minimum fine is MMK 20 million, and the illicit proceeds will also be confiscated. The law does not address how online gambling platforms can obtain official approval.

Myanmar’s Cybersecurity Law represents a significant step in the country’s regulation and oversight of digital security and online activities. Businesses, digital platform providers, cybersecurity service providers, and VPN providers need to understand these requirements and ensure compliance to prevent substantial penalties.

Nonetheless, given that services such as VPNs are very widely used, it remains to be seen how these new far-reaching regulations will actually be enforced.

 

This article was prepared with the assistance of Tilleke & Gibbins intern Ian Michael Yam.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 17, 2023
Since the issuance last October of Decree No. 71/2022/ND-CP (“Decree 71”), the differentiation of film vs. non-film content has become increasingly important for pay-TV service providers in Vietnam, because they are subject to completely different licensing requirements. With the effectiveness of Decree 71 on January 1, 2023, overseas providers of over-the-top (OTT) pay-TV services, including video on demand (VOD) content, to Vietnamese users are subject to licensing requirements and the establishment of a local presence in Vietnam. Meanwhile, the new Cinema Law promulgated on June 15, 2022, and its guiding Decree No. 131/2022/ND-CP dated December 31, 2022—both of which also took effect on January 1, 2023—do not impose any licensing requirements on film disseminators. Although there are ambiguities in Decree 71’s wording, the Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC) and the Authority for Broadcasting and Electronic Information (ABEI) under the MIC have confirmed orally in a closed industry meeting, without written confirmation, that for VOD film-only content, OTT pay-TV service providers are exempted from the licensing requirements of Decree 71 and are instead subject to regulations of the Cinema Law. This is why film vs. non-film content has become critical in shaping the business models of overseas pay-TV service providers. In this article, we provide an overview of the current regulations and draft regulations with regard to the classification/rating of film content under the regulations of the Cinema Law and its sub-laws, and the classification/rating of non-film content under the regulations of Decree 71.   Film Classification/Rating Under the Cinema Law, “films” are defined to include feature films, documentaries, cartoons, and films of combined genres. The law explicitly provides that “films” do not include recorded products for disseminating news, art shows, video games, recorded products that show the activities of one or more people and describe events and situations,
March 30, 2023
Digital asset litigation is one of the most cutting-edge types of litigation in Thailand. There are factual, technical, regulatory, and legal challenges and hurdles for the parties to the dispute throughout all procedural stages. This is mainly because digital assets are different in nature from more conventional types of assets, as they are digitally created and used on a blockchain network. Legal Status The first issue to be aware of in approaching digital asset litigation is the legal status of digital assets. Under Thai law, there are two key terms concerning digital assets’ legal status: “thing” and “property.” Things are tangible objects, while property provides a much wider range of meaning. Property could be anything—including intangible objects that may be of value and able to be appropriated. It is fairly clear that digital assets are not a “thing” since they are not tangible. However, determining whether digital assets are “property” is even more complicated. Although digital assets are intangible objects, one might argue that, unlike fiat money, they do not have any inherent value but are rather conferred value based on certain people’s perspective. (For example, the Bank of Thailand expressed this opinion of bitcoin in 2014.) Some may even argue that digital assets cannot be possessed and therefore cannot be appropriated. According to these arguments, digital assets should not be regarded as a property either. Legal Grounds Determining whether digital assets are things, property, or something else altogether is crucial to any subsequent litigation. In Thailand, the party initiating the lawsuit (the plaintiff) generally has to state the relevant legal grounds for the complaint—that is, the different relevant legal provisions that the court is to apply to the case. These provisions of Thai laws mostly refer only to “things” or to “property,” not both. This often means that
March 20, 2023
Thailand has enacted new legislation to counter cybercrime and scams. The Royal Decree on Measures for Protection and Suppression of Technology Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023) (“Cybercrime Decree”) was published in the Government Gazette on March 16, 2023, and took effect the following day. The Cybercrime Decree provides a new legal tool to interrupt the money-laundering process and aims to crack down on cybercrime perpetrators and scammers by providing stronger legal measures applying to certain types of offenders that had not been sufficiently covered by existing laws. This new legislation grants victims the right to have commercial banks and online payment platforms freeze suspicious transactions and obligates these banks and platforms to comply with such requests. It further requires these banks and platforms—as well as other service providers—to share data for the prompt prevention and suppression of cybercrime. The key rights, duties, and offenses established by the Cybercrime Decree are detailed below. Freezing Transactions The Cybercrime Decree requires commercial banks and online payment platforms to temporarily freeze (for 72 hours) any related transactions of their account holders upon receipt of an alert from the account holder that he or she is the victim of cybercrime. Victims can report these illicit transactions by phone or electronic means. If by phone, the relevant bank or platform must document the call. The victim must file a police complaint about the illicit transaction within 72 hours of the freeze being made. A police inquiry officer will then notify the bank or platform about the complaint, and the transaction freeze must be maintained for seven days from the filing of the complaint with the police. The police will then determine whether it is necessary to keep the transaction frozen for longer than seven days. If the seven days lapse without a further order to freeze the
February 28, 2023
Influencer marketing and the creation of sponsored content is an increasingly popular way for brands to reach their target audience. Although there is no universal definition of an “influencer,” the term is broadly used to describe people who are able to affect purchasing decisions of others through their relationship with their audience. In the context of social media and the creator economy, influencers are usually people with significant followings on platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, Twitch, or YouTube who are viewed as celebrities, opinion leaders, trendsetters, or experts in their respective field. Based on a study conducted by Nielsen in 2022, 80% of social media users in Asia who follow influencers are likely to purchase products recommended by the influencers. Brand owners should be aware of five key legal considerations when entering into influencer marketing agreements. 1. Making informed decisions through due diligence Every collaboration with an influencer is a business relationship. Brands must conduct thorough due diligence on potential influencers prior to engaging them. This may include deep dives into the individual’s old social media posts, as well as requests for disclosure of prior controversial incidents and existing brand associations. For example, a health and fitness brand may not want—for both legal and commercial reasons—to be publicly associated with an influencer who is a brand ambassador of electronic cigarettes, no matter how impressive the latter’s Instagram following or deadlift record is. Brands should also ensure that their influencer marketing agreements include relevant representations and warranties that the influencer has not and will not commit a crime or act in a way that may cause negative publicity for the brand. This may include racist, extremist, homophobic, violent, or misogynistic acts, or any other acts that are obscene or against public order. 2. Clearly defining the scope of engagement Brands