Judgment No. CCZ 14/2016113 Const. Application No. CCZ 67/13 misplaced remedy because those provJsJons had no direct relationship with the bias in the programme by the ZBC which she is complaining about. As a law of general application, the provisions the validity of which is impugned limit the applicant's right not to be compulsorily deprived of property except by a law which meets the conditions set out ins 71(3)(b)(i) or (ii) of the Constitution. They do so only for the reason that as a law of taxation they cannot contain the terms required under s 71(3)(c)-(e) of the Constitution as no compensation is payable for taxation. Disguising an attack on the validity of conduct as an attack on the constitutionality of legislation governing that conduct cannot save the applicant from the requirements of the principle of subsidiarity. What the applicant is complaining about is the alleged violation of the right to fair and unbiased administrative conduct by the ZBC. That right is protected by para. (d) of Part 1 of the Seventh Schedule as read with s 3 of the Administrative Justice Act. The Administrative Justice Act provides the remedy for the enforcement of the protection of the right in question. It must be said that the applicant's conduct of deliberately refusing to pay the licence fee for possessing a television set remains a criminal offence notwithstanding the attempt to justify the offence on account of the alleged biased programming by the public broadcaster in favour of ZANU-PF. Wrongful conduct on the part of the public broadcaster cannot justify her own criminal conduct. Two wrongs never make a right. Both conducts infringe the law. There is no doubt that a person who deliberately refuses to fulfil an obligation backed by criminal law