Botswana from any obligation of common sense and fair play, especially in matters of contest among political parties. Fired One of the more blatant setbacks for free speech in broadcasting occurred when popular Gabz FM anchor Reginald Richardson and his producer Keikantse Shumba were fired by the radio station’s management under duress from the BDP government early in the year under review. Their firing followed the airing of the secret recording of a conversation between leading members of the ruling party ‘poaching’ from the opposition Botswana Congress Party with promises of considerable largesse. Their exit from the airwaves was the culmination of years of an acrimonious stance adopted by the government towards the station, especially a popular interactive callin morning programme run by the two that was often scrambled by suspected agents of Botswana’s notorious secret service, the Directorate of Intelligence and Security Services (DISS). ACCESS TO INFORMATION The Government of Botswana has a raft of laws that it can tap into to impede free flow of information or use to punish ‘errant’ journalists in the event that information deemed ‘protected’ by these laws was published. The unwanted laws include the National Security Act, the Media Practitioners Act 1998, the Sedition Act, the Protected Areas Act and the Cybercrimes and Computer Related Act 2007, as well as the laws establishing the DISS and the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crimes. While the Media Practitioners Act (MPA) remains in abeyance because the Law Society of Botswana has ignored a requirement to second three of its members to a committee prescribed under this Act, the law hangs like an albatross on the neck of the body politic of media workers. The Government of Botswana has a raft of laws that it can tap into to impede free flow of information or use to punish ‘errant’ journalists in the event that information deemed ‘protected’ by these laws was published. Its most obnoxious incursion into media freedom is found in Section 6 where it sought to have journalists registered by an Executive Committee. The law also seeks to enforce the right of reply that should be published not later than two subsequent editions after the ‘offending’ article and to the same degree of prominence as the original article. The difficulty with this is that it takes away the Editor’s authority and autonomy to decide what to publish, when to publish it and where to place it in the newspaper. This is an invaluable right So This is Democracy? 2017 35