60 S.C. 128\02 12(1)(f), (2) and (3), sections 15 and 16. It is very clear that these provisions regulate the conduct of business by successful applicants and holders of broadcasting licences. The applicant does not hold such a licence. The applicant has applied to this Court and to the Broadcasting Authority for a broadcasting licence. have the jurisdiction to grant such a licence. This Court does not The Broadcasting Authority has not granted the applicant a licence. In the result I come to the conclusion that section 4(2) and (3) and section 9(3) of the Act are constitutional. Sections 6, 9(1) and (2) are unconstitutional. The applicant has not established locus standi to challenge all the other sections impugned as set out in the draft order. Different judges have come to different conclusions in respect of the different sections of the Act that have been challenged. The net result is as follows: (1) The court unanimously finds that sections 4(2) and (3) are constitutional. (2) The court unanimously finds that the applicant has no locus standi in judicio to challenge the constitutionality of section 11(1) as read with paragraph 9(1)(b) and (c) of the Fifth Schedule. (3) The Court unanimously finds section 6, sections 9(1) and (2) unconstitutional and are hereby struck down. (4) The majority of the court finds section 9(3) unconstitutional and it is hereby also struck down. (5) The majority of the court also hereby dismisses the application to have the following sections struck down as unconstitutional: