48 S.C. 128\02 contention is that the Broadcasting Authority, as constituted in terms of section 4, does not provide sufficient independence for that body and consequently is unconstitutional. Athukorale supra. In support of this proposition Mr de Bourbon cited the case of I accept that Athukorale’s case, supra is authority for the proposition that a regulating authority that is unduly dependent on the government is unconstitutional. In determining whether a provision creates a dependent or independent regulating authority the standard three tier test enunciated in Nyambirayi’s case, supra, provides no guidance as that test does not deal with independence or lack of it of a regulating authority. A comparison of this section with provisions found in other jurisdictions is therefore instructive. This section, as already pointed out, is very similar to section 1(2) of the British Broadcasting Act [Chapter 42] of 1990 which provides that the Independent Television Commission shall consist of a Chairman and a deputy Chairman appointed by the Secretary of State and such other members appointed by the Secretary of State, not being less than eight nor more than ten as he may, from time to time, determine. Similarly the Australian Broadcasting Services Act 1992 creates the Australian Broadcasting Authority as the licensing and regulating authority. The Australian Broadcasting Authority consists of seven members all appointed by the Governor-General without any reference to any other body or persons outside governmental structures. In Australia the Governor-General and the Minister for Communications, Information, Technology and Arts have other controlling powers that I have already adverted to in the analysis of the Australian Act above.