EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study assesses the compliance of Namibian legislation to the provisions of the SADC Protocol on Culture, Information and Sport (‘SADC Protocol’), the African Commission’s Declaration of Principles on Free Expression in Africa (‘AC Declaration’), and the SADC Declaration on Information and Communication Technology (‘ICT Declaration’). Namibia has a legal obligation to incorporate the provisions of the SADC Protocol and AC Declaration into its laws. Although still a beacon of light in an often-bleak landscape, Namibia is no longer at the forefront of the promotion of free expression and access to information in the SADC region. Namibia has not kept pace with the development of contemporary African standards in this regard. In particular, the study found that Namibia’s policy and legislative framework fell short of the provisions of the SADC Protocol, and AC and ICT Declarations in the following areas: • The current information policy is out of date and needs to be revised to incorporate the provisions of the SADC Protocol, AC Declaration and ICT Declaration. The experience of Botswana in drafting a new broadcasting policy through a comprehensive consultative process may be worth referring to in this regard. • Upholding and promoting the right of access to information forms a major component of the Protocol and Declarations. Namibia’s Constitution does not explicitly guarantee the right of access to information, and no access to information laws exist. Rather, Namibia’s laws relating to information are restrictive and out of synch with modern standards. Zambia’s Freedom of Information Bill may be an example to follow in remedying this situation. • The SADC Protocol on Culture, Information and Sport, and the related SADC Protocol on Transport, Communications and Meteorology, both of which have been ratified by the Namibian Parliament, provide for the separate but aligned regulation of communications infrastructure and content. Namibia currently has one regulator for communications content and infrastructure, a discrepancy that looks set to continue should the Draft Communications Bill be passed in its current form. Meanwhile, Botswana, Zambia and South Africa provide for the separate but aligned regulation of broadcasting and telecommunications, a move that appears to be more in line with the provisions of the relevant SADC protocols. • One of the major shortcomings in Namibian legislation governing media and communications is the lack of independence afforded to regulators and the boards of public media. Contemporary laws in Botswana, Zambia and South Africa, profiled in this study, provide a greater degree of independence to regulators and public media, as envisaged in the SADC Protocol, and the AC and ICT Declarations. • In particular, legislation governing the Namibian Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) contradicts contemporary African standards in that it does not guarantee the independence of the national broadcaster, and allows the broadcaster to operate beyond the control of the broadcasting regulator. To a certain degree, legislation passed in Zambia and South Africa has made these countries’ national broadcasters accountable to the public through Parliament. These laws, outlined in this study, have also placed the national broadcasters under the control of the broadcasting regulator. Botswana’s draft broadcasting policy makes similar provisions, which are provided for in the SADC Protocol and AC Declaration. • Current legislation governing the regulation of media and communications in Namibia is rooted in the by-gone era of laissez-faire free market liberalism. This approach has failed to promote the kind of media pluralism considered a pre-requisite for development and nation building. The concept of regulated pluralism, whereby regulators proactively promote diversity of media ownership and content, runs throughout the SADC Protocol and the AC and ICT Declarations. It also forms the Namibia Media Law Audit – report final draft 3