51 (a) S.C. 128\02 six ex officio members, namely – (i) the Secretary to the Ministry of the Minister in charge of the subject of Information and Broadcasting or his representative; (ii) the Secretary to the Ministry of the Minister in charge of the subject of Defence or his representative; (iii) the Secretary to the Ministry of the Minister in charge of the subject of Posts and Telecommunications or his representative; (iv) the Secretary to the Ministry of the Minister in charge of the subject of Education and Cultural Affairs or his representative; (v) the Secretary to the Treasury or his representative; (vi) (b) (2) the Chairman, National Film Corporation of Sri Lanka; and five other members appointed by the Minister, at least two of whom shall be persons who have had experience in the field of broadcasting. A member appointed under this section is hereinafter referred to as ‘an appointed member’ of the Board. …” The Sri Lankan Supreme Court was dissatisfied with the above provision and observed:- “Having regard to the limited availability of broadcasting frequencies, the regulation of broadcasting was necessary to ensure the adequate coverage of issues and to prevent the monopolistic domination of the frequency spectrum by the government or by a few individuals. On that basis regulation did not violate the right to freedom of speech but rather advanced it by serving the interests of the whole community and giving listeners and viewers the opportunity to consider a range of points of view. However, in order to safeguard the fundamental right of freedom of thought and expression, the regulatory body had to be independent of the government. In the instant case, the regulatory body envisaged by the Bill clearly lacked that independence, since its members were government appointees with no security of tenure, and it was obliged to follow directions given by the minister. Moreover, the Bill would empower the minister to interfere with the presentation of programmes