government had processed over 20 community radio station licences at the time of submitting the Report. As is the norm, the Zimbabwe civil society organisations inputted the mid-term process by producing reports such as the Zimbabwe Civil Society Organisations Mid-Term Report of the Universal Periodic Report87, produced and submitted to the UPR process as a shadow report. The contents of this report and those of other stakeholders were utilised by the UPR secretariat in preparing the Zimbabwe Mid-Term Assessment Report in August 2014. The above three reports which appear to be the most comprehensive literature on the subject so far have concluded that issues of reforming legislation and state conduct inconsistent to exercise of freedom of expression has been ‘partially implemented’. They acknowledge the insertion of section 61 of the Constitution as guaranteeing freedom of expression and freedom of the media. However, these reports make no specific reference to artistic freedom such that this aspect of freedom of expression has not been specifically addressed notwithstanding its persistent violation as discussed in the earlier parts of this report. Further, when analysing laws that need to be reformed, there is no attempt to make reference to how artistic freedom is affected by such as POSA, AIPPA and the host of national legislation discussed above. Furthermore, there is no mention of the Censorship Act as one of the laws in need of much needed reform and revision to mitigate the violations that are a result of its current form. It appears the omission to make specific reference to artistic freedom emanated from the fact that none of the participating countries during the UPR process made specific mention of the need to address freedom of artistic expression. The recommendations were addressing freedom of expression at large. 87 Report available at: 71 | P a g e