SECTOR 3 3.2 Broadcasting is regulated by an independent body adequately protected by law against interference whose board is appointed - in an open way - involving civil society and not dominated by any particular political party. Section 192 of the South African Constitution provides for “an independent authority to regulate broadcasting in the public interest… to ensure fairness and a diversity of views broadly representing South African society.” Currently the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) reports to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Communications. ICASA was established in terms of the ICASA Act31 of 2000 (amended in 200632) to regulate telecommunications, broadcasting and postal services. It is referred to as a Chapter 9 body, which means it must be independent from government as a safeguard for democracy, but this institution was not established by the Constitution and as such does not have the same kind of independence as the six existing, constitutionally-guaranteed Chapter 9 institutions, which include the Electoral Commission and the South African Human Rights Commission. As a result, it is seen to be weak and easily dominated by vested interests in both business and the ANC, especially with regard to calling the SABC to account. Its capacity and independence have been compromised, and it cannot regulate broadcasting in the public interest or ensure that broadcasters meet their constitutional mandates. An attempt was made in 2010 to pass a Public Service Broadcasting Bill (mentioned in Indicator 1.10), which would have weakened ICASA further and given it less control over the SABC. Lobbying ultimately led to this bill being withdrawn. “It suits the government to have a weak regulator. ICASA is too weak to perform its own functions, one of which is meant to be monitoring the regulatory compliance of broadcasters, including the SABC, in terms of local content quotas and advertising requirements, which it clearly does not do. It suffers from the same problem afflicting other parastatals or semi-government institutions: a lack of credibility. Many in the industry do not take ICASA seriously because there is a sense that its board members are political appointees.” IIn addition, the blacklisting saga, in which the SABC was accused of placing a blanket ban on particular commentators and analysts perceived to be unfriendly to the powers that be, showed ICASA to be weak in terms of regulating the state broadcaster. When the Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) laid a complaint with ICASA in 2007, claiming the SABC had violated the Broadcasting Act by providing 31 South Africa. Independent Communications Authority of South Africa, Act 13 of 2000. 32 South Africa. Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Amendment, Act 3 of 2006. AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER SOUTH AFRICA 2013 49