There are still not enough good test cases for the media law to be better defined and developed in the country. Lawyers generally should apply their minds more thoroughly to the role of the media in a democracy and thus help to campaign for media freedom by vigorously fighting against litigation levied against the media. More media scholars should also assist the media in their cause. It is always difficult to get enough information from the media about the nature and the number of cases they are facing at any one time. Given its mandate, though, MISA Botswana should take a stronger position to help get a good test case through the Botswana courts, even as a friend of the court, especially where a fundamental right is being threatened or general human rights issues are involved. The example of Tanzania was quoted in this regard, where the Media Council always takes its position as a friend of the court whenever the media in that country is dragged before the courts by litigants. MISA should do more to educate the media about these matters as they can ultimately affect press freedom and freedom of expression and have a chilling effect on the investigative media. There should also be more proactive-ness on the part of the media – for example by making greater use of the Babegi Legal Defense Fund to fight their cases in the courts. Generally, professionalism needs to be improved to avoid lawsuits as a result of misquoting and other mistakes made by the media themselves. They are expected to report responsibly and involve their in-house lawyers more in their daily operations to ensure that their reports are beyond legal reproach. They should also invest more money in protecting themselves and taking out professional insurance against litigation. Participants agreed that the mere fact of litigation being brought against the media is not necessarily a hindrance to their being able to work freely. It is only when the right to sue is being abused for example by people in positions of authority that there is cause for concern. Another point of concern is the use of the Immigration Act to curtail freedom of expression. The deportation of Professor Good was cited as one worrying example. There have also been two other cases where the relevant clause in the Act has been used to expel foreign journalists from the country. This means that the Immigration Act can be used by government to intimidate foreign journalists working in Botswana. On a more general level there is a tendency among government authorities and certain economic players not to listen to and even to suppress divergent views. Many people are afraid to freely express themselves for fear of losing tenders or employment. Economic and other sanctions can be applied in order for people to toe the line. “In Botswana, sometimes you have to get drunk before you can freely express yourself”, said one participant. There is also a general culture of suppressing freedom of expression in the case of children and young people who are not allowed to express themselves creatively and freely. For example, it is regarded as rude for a young person to criticize someone older than him- or herself or someone in a position of authority. Over the last two years, there have been persistent reports of secret agents being active against politicians and trade unionists – especially during the time of heightened factional tensions within the ruling party. The general consensus was that free expression among citizens is also not being enhanced because of the absence of a strong civic movement to monitor citizens’ freedom of expression. So This Is Democracy? 2007 -150- Media Institute of Southern Africa