Judgment No. CCZ 9/2016 32 Const. Application No. CCZ 316/2012 In an article titled “The Unneccessary Gravity of the Soul: Public Service Broadcasters or Government Mouthpieces – An Appraisal of Public Service Broadcasting in Botswana” Vol. 10 Issue 1 April 2013 SCRIPT ed TB Balule writes that public broadcasting service “which is a particular way of exercising freedom of expression, serves as a vehicle for self-expression, a reflection of public opinion, an informer of the public, and a participant in the formation of public opinion”. Pluralism and diversity of programmes promote the full enjoyment of freedom of expression in that they ensure that citizens have access to a wide range of information and ideas on a variety of subjects. One of the fundamental requirements of the right to freedom of expression is the need for a broad plurality of information: Inter American Court of Human Rights Rios et al. v Venezuela, Judgment of January 28, 2009 para. 106. A public broadcaster that is free from political interference and commercial pressures has the potential to ensure quality programming covering a wide range of interests that respond to all sectors of the public thereby promoting pluralism and diversity of programme content. Balule at pp 81-82. What is of paramount importance is not the rights of the public broadcaster. What is paramount is the collective right of the viewers and listeners in receiving a balanced presentation of ideas and information on diverse matters of public concern by television and radio. The public’s free speech interest in broadcasting is a collective and not an individual right in that the people as a whole retain their interest in free speech by radio and television. The people as a whole also retain the collective right to have the medium of television and radio broadcasting function consistently with the ends and purposes of the constitutional protection of