Judgment No. CCZ 9/2016 41 Const. Application No. CCZ 316/2012 commercial funding methods have the tendency to undermine public broadcasting service values. One of the important definitional features of a public broadcasting service system is absence of efforts to raise funds from viewers and listeners. The usual source of revenue is taxation. It follows that taxation as the mechanism of funding adopted by the State cannot be examined without reference to the substance of the scheme for public broadcasting service embodied in the provisions of the Act of which it is an integral part. What is clear is that the mechanism of funding adopted by the Parliament is part of a system of broadcasting service. The primary object of the broadcasting service is to protect and promote the right of the public to receive suitable access to social, political, cultural, moral and other ideas and experiences by television and radio programmes consistent with the requirements of freedom of expression. The method of funding, combined with the editorial independence and the public interest standard, provides a viable solution to the governmental control problem consistent with the principles of freedom of expression. The issue of an appropriate method of funding for a public broadcaster like the ZBC is intrinsically linked to the fundamental question whether the country should have a public broadcasting service system or not. The applicants labored under the mistaken belief that the purpose of s 38 B(1) of the Act is to compel the holder of the television or radio licence to view or listen to programmes broadcast by the ZBC. Both applicants said the reason why they were opposed to the licensing fee system of funding in this case is that they did not want to receive broadcasting service from the ZBC. Musangano Lodge went further to say it did not want to pay the licence fees because there was no broadcasting service from ZBC reaching the area where its business is located. It