The National Audiovisual Regulatory Board (CNRA) was set up with the adoption of Law no. 2006-04 of 4 January 2006 without prior consultation with the media and civil society players. A reading of the law reveals flaws: certain provisions are contrary to international principles and standards relating to the freedom of expression governing statutory and functional independence. By virtue of its status as an independent administrative authority, the CNRA is exempted from any subordination. In spite of various safeguards, including the immunity and irrevocability of its members, the umbilical cord has not been completely severed, for their appointment is made by Presidential Decree without open public consultation. Moreover, there is no public control mechanism with regard to the members of the CNRA; its report is not submitted to the representatives of the nation, but to the President of the Republic. The CNRA’s legitimacy is widely contested,1 in spite of the change in its composition, which has included media professionals for some months. This is largely due to the method by which its members are appointed. Furthermore, the Law of 6 January 1992 has transformed the RTS into a national enterprise endowed with management autonomy but with no true independence from the government. Indeed, the method of appointment of its leaders as laid down by the law provides the RST with no guarantee of independence from the government and this is evident in its operation. State broadcasting services do not have sufficient funding to protect them from arbitrary interference in their budgets and operations. National television enjoys indirect funding in the form of a small tax levied on electricity invoices, in addition to subsidies granted by the State. The procedures for allocating radio and television frequencies are not known. The Agency for Telecommunications and Postal Regulation (ARTP) takes care of the technical aspects, while the decision to allocate frequencies is the preserve of the Ministry of Communications in consultation with the Presidency of the Republic. Transparency in the allocation of audiovisual licences is a major challenge for the sector. In addition to the matter of frequencies, that of media funding is a cause for concern. Indeed, the structure of the capital of many media remains unknown. This considerably limits the development of the sector and increases the risk of political and other interference. The media continue to work under multiple pressures, even though the political environment has calmed down and improved. Although assaults have decreased over the last few months, concerns persist owing to the failure to repeal certain legal provisions pertaining to “l’injure” and “l’offense” – abuse and injury/insult/ contempt – of the head of state, which are still given considerable importance in Senegalese legislation whereas they have now become obsolete and outdated. Le 1 Its members are all appointed by the President without public consultation. AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER SENEGAL 2013 71