Violations of Freedom of Expression during the 2025–2026 Sham Election Period
The 2025-2026 Sham Election and Political Landscape
The sham election held by the military junta in late 2025 and early 2026 was the first election conducted since the 2021 military coup. It was carried out in three phases: the first on 28 December 2025 across 102 townships; the second on 11 January 2026 across 100 townships; and the third on 25 January 2026 across 63 townships. Although the junta framed this sham election as a multi-party democratic process, in practice even before the official election period began it had been carrying out violence against civilians, arbitrary arrests, and the continuous repression of the media.
In the sham election, 84 political parties including Myanmar’s largest opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD) were dissolved, and only 63 parties approved by the military were permitted to contest. Furthermore, polling could only be held in areas the military deemed secure, resulting in at least 121 constituencies being excluded. Although the sham election was held in conflict regions such as Chin State and Rakhine State, voter participation was extremely limited: only 2 of 9 townships in Chin State and 3 of 17 in Rakhine State held polls. Across these two states, the sham election could be held in fewer than 25 percent of all townships 4 a clear indication that a large portion of the population was denied the opportunity to participate.
In the sham election, the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) running essentially without opposition won 739 of the 1,025 contested seats, securing more than 72 percent.
At the same time, the military sought to secure political legitimacy by continuing to rely on the advantages built into the 2008 Constitution. Under that constitution, 25 percent of all parliamentary seats are automatically reserved for military representatives regardless of the popular vote, thereby limiting the influence of elected lawmakers. When the 739 seats won by the USDP are combined with the 25 percent of seats constitutionally reserved for the military, the junta’s dominance over parliament becomes effectively absolute. This sham election, therefore, was not intended to bring about a civilian government but rather to perpetuate military rule under the protection of the provisions of the 2008 Constitution that already favor the military.
Although the military propagated the claim that a free and fair general election was being held, throughout the election period, it continued to conduct airstrikes and ground offensives without interruption. In Sagaing Region, Chin State, and Tanintharyi Region, aerial bombings were carried out before, during, and after the election; in the same period, there were also attacks using paramotors (powered paragliders), as well as shootings that caused deaths and injuries. According to the United Nations, the military carried out 408 airstrikes during the election period, killing at least 170 civilians.
1.1 Situation of Freedom of Expression during the Sham Election Period
During the junta’s sham election period, the public’s freedom of expression was severely violated. In order to safeguard its sham election, the military silenced public voices through a variety of means. Activists, protest leaders, students, artists, and even ordinary civilians were arrested and detained simply for expressing views or posting comments on social media. Even peaceful expressions of dissent such as distributing leaflets opposing the sham election or speaking out against it were met with severe punishments.
Some of those arrested received prison sentences of up to several decades for everyday actions such as reacting to social media posts or sharing satirical content. These arbitrary arrests demonstrate that the law was being used not primarily to safeguard the election, but to silence political dissent and to control public perceptions of politics and the military. From the public’s perspective, sustained pressure and intimidation led to a widespread perception that expressing political views had become dangerous. The military systematically denied the public’s freedom to share opinions on the election and to voice criticism, which further affirms its characterization as a sham election.
1.2 The International Community’s View of the Sham Election
The international community has widely condemned this election as a sham election organized by the State Administration Council (SAC) illegitimate and fraudulent in nature. UN Special Rapporteur Tom Andrews described it as a staged production conducted under coercion and violence, urging that its results not be recognized. The United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and Australia have likewise denounced the election as a process devoid of freedom, fairness, and legitimacy, citing the exclusion of opposition parties including the National League for Democracy (NLD) and the severely repressive political environment.10 The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has stated that it cannot endorse any election held without a cessation of military violence and inclusive, broad-based political dialogue. 11 Human rights organizations and civil society groups have similarly described the election as a deception designed to project the appearance of democracy. The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and other monitoring bodies have also expressed concern over the military’s violence, mass arrests, and the denial of public freedoms.12 As a result, the junta’s stage-managed election is widely viewed not only as lacking formal international recognition but as a dangerous exercise aimed solely at perpetuating military authoritarianism.