61
S.C. 128\02
(a)
sections 8(1) and (2) and section 22(2)
(b)
section 8(5)
(c)
section 11(4)
(d)
section 12(1)(f)(2) and (3)
(e)
section 15 and 16
Costs normally follow the result.
In the present case both parties were partially
successful and the majority of the court has concluded that equity demands that there
be no order as to costs.
SANDURA
JA:
I have read the judgment prepared by
CHIDYAUSIKU CJ and agree that sections 6, 9(1) and 9(2) of the Broadcasting
Services Act [Chapter 12:06] (“the Act”) are inconsistent with s 20(1) of the
Constitution of Zimbabwe (“the Constitution”). Secondly, I agree that it has not been
shown that sections 4(2) and 4(3) of the Act contravene s 20(1) of the Constitution.
Thirdly, I agree, but for a different reason, that the applicant does not have the locus
standi in judicio to challenge the constitutionality of s 11(1) of the Act, as read with
para 9(1)(b) and (c) of the Fifth Schedule to the Act.
In my view, the only valid
reason for the conclusion that the applicant does not have the requisite locus standi is
that the conditions set out in para 9(1)(b) and (c) of the Fifth Schedule only apply to a
commercial television broadcasting licence.
They do not apply to a radio
broadcasting licence which, according to the applicant’s founding affidavit, is the type
Select target paragraph3
Add to table of contents