74 S.C. 128\02 I think it is. Are the measures designed to meet the legislative objective rationally connected to it? I do not think they are. In my view, there is no rational connection between the requirement that a broadcasting company must have at least ten shareholders, and the legislative objective of ensuring that as many Zimbabweans as possible “have the opportunity to participate in the utilisation, control and ownership of their resource.” The percentage of ten is arbitrary. Are the means used to impair the freedom of expression no more than is necessary to accomplish the legislative objective? I do not think so. The legislative objective could be achieved in other ways, such as increasing the number of national broadcasting licences. In the circumstances, the restriction in s 8(5) is not reasonably justifiable in a democratic society, and is, therefore, in breach of s 20(1) of the Constitution. III. Section 9(3) This section reads as follows:“With the exception of a public broadcaster, a broadcasting licence and a signal carrier licence shall not be issued to the same person …” It was common cause that this provision constituted a restriction on freedom of expression. The only issue was whether the restriction was reasonably