78 S.C. 128\02 As I am satisfied that s 11(4)(a) constitutes a restriction on freedom of expression, I proceed to consider whether the restriction is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society. The legislative objective set out by the second respondent in respect of this provision is to cater for minority language groups. I now wish to subject that objective to the three-part test. Is the legislative objective sufficiently important to justify a restriction on the freedom of expression? I think it is. Are the measures designed to meet the legislative objective rationally connected to it? I do not think so. There is no rational connection between the requirement that at least ten per centum of the total programming content broadcast by a licensee shall be in any of the national aboriginal languages other than Shona and Ndebele, and the legislative objective of ensuring that minority language groups are catered for. The determination of the percentage of ten is not rational but arbitrary. Are the means to impair the freedom of expression no more than is necessary to accomplish the objective? I do not think so. In my view, there are other ways of achieving the legislative objective without imposing a restriction on the private broadcaster’s freedom of expression. For example, the ZBC, with four national radio broadcasting stations and