STATE OF THE MEDIA REPORT QUARTER 3. 2020 This is against a backdrop of several clawback clauses that already undermine media freedom 18 . Among the legal provisions that stifle press freedom are the law on defamation of the President (Section 69 of the Penal Code), Seditious Practices (Section 60 of the Penal Code), State Security Act (Chapter 111 of the Laws of Zambia) and Prohibited Publications (Section 53 of the Penal Code), among others. As such, if the content of the Bill is not safeguarded, it risks joining the long list of laws that stifle freedom of the press. In effect, the route chosen by the media fraternity is a regulatory model that falls under co-regulation, where the media agree on the standards and government merely provides the framework for enacting the standards into law without necessarily interfering with the content. It is, essentially, a hybrid of self and statutory regulation19. It is, therefore, important that this process is respected by all parties involved. Secondly, the arbitrary actions (such as the closure of Prime Television) witnessed in past quarters and documented in State of the Media Reports at the hand of government regulatory agencies such as ZICTA and IBA cast aspersions on the independence and autonomy of the proposed regulatory council. As such, it is also critical that government understands the need for independence of the self-regulatory process which thrives on autonomy as already envisaged in the proposed Bill. Some practitioners have equally raised concerns on the efficacy of media regulation, especially that it is a field without clearly defined boundaries and dealing with a very fluid tenet of freedom of expression. Others have raised 18 19 According to Nkandu, E. (2012). A report on study of media laws and policies in Zambia. Lusaka: European Union/Diakonia/Media Institute of Southern Africa See https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/egm/med ia2002/reports/EP3Cishecki.PDF 22