Former Telenor head in Myanmar: - Telenor is not telling the truth

In February 2021, a military coup shattered the fragile democratic progress in Myanmar, plunging the country into chaos and violence. As the military junta seized control, concerns about surveillance and digital privacy intensified, particularly regarding the role of international telecom companies operating within the region. One such company was Telenor, a Norwegian telecommunications giant that had been active in Myanmar since its early days. The controversy surrounding Telenor's involvement has grown sharper in recent years, especially after allegations emerged suggesting that the company might have deployed a sophisticated surveillance tool known as the Lawful Intercept Gateway (LIG).

The LIG system allows authorities to intercept phone calls and text messages directly. While all major telecom providers are legally required to maintain such systems, questions arose about whether Telenor actually implemented and tested this technology in Myanmar. This became a central point of contention following the military takeover, as the potential misuse of such tools could enable the junta to monitor and suppress dissent more effectively.

Jon Omund Revhaug, who served as CEO of Telenor Myanmar during the time of the coup, has consistently denied that the company ever activated or tested the LIG system. In a December 2024 interview with NRK, Revhaug stated that the system had not been used under his leadership and that there were no tests conducted on the equipment. He reiterated these claims in a follow-up interview in July 2025, emphasizing that Telenor did not engage in testing the system while they were in charge.

However, these statements contrast sharply with the account given by "John," a former high-ranking employee at Telenor Myanmar. John worked in the compliance department, responsible for ensuring the company adhered to legal standards and ethical guidelines. According to him, Telenor initially maintained a strong reputation among locals, but over time, the leadership began to deviate from these principles. Compliance issues were raised internally, yet these concerns were reportedly ignored or downplayed by higher management.

John’s perspective suggests that the company’s commitment to ethical practices wavered after some years. He described how internal communications from the compliance team were not adequately addressed, leading to a growing sense that Telenor was no longer upholding the standards it once claimed to support. These discrepancies between official statements and insider accounts have fueled skepticism about the true nature of Telenor’s operations in Myanmar.

The situation took on added gravity when the military junta gained access to the LIG system. If indeed Telenor had deployed and activated this technology before their departure, it could have become a powerful instrument for the regime to track and target opposition groups. The implications of this are profound, considering the widespread use of mobile phones across all sectors of society, including religious institutions and remote communities.

As the conflict continues, the future of Telenor’s legacy in Myanmar remains uncertain. With the company having sold its operations in the country shortly after the coup, the focus now shifts to accountability and transparency. Whether the company will face scrutiny for its past actions or if the truth behind the LIG system will ever come to light remains to be seen. Meanwhile, individuals like John continue to voice their concerns, highlighting the complex interplay between corporate responsibility, national security, and human rights in times of political upheaval.