the right to warrantless communications interception and surveillance. MISA also pointed out that the inclusion of the contentious clauses would have a chilling effect on the ability of the media to conduct its work as well as on the right of all persons to privacy and it would also damage the good reputation Botswana has as a stable and democratic country.(5) This reputation can be preserved through Article 12 of Botswana’s Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression. In practice, however, a culture of fear thrived under former President Khama, to an extent that it cultivated an atmosphere of mistrust and trepidation, alongside inherent self-censorship. While the situation has eased considerably under current President Masisi, there are several laws that restrict freedom of expression. These laws, which remain in Botswana’s statutes and target the media, have been described by critics as unconstitutional because they give the authorities discretionary powers to impose penalties on critics. Media freedom campaigners such as MISA Botswana believe a long-term solution would be the enactment of laws that promote transparency, accountability, and independence in the media industry. One such deficiency is the lack of an access to information law and advocates have emphasised that the adoption of such a law will facilitate a culture of transparency and openness in Botswana’s government institutions. During their meeting with the International Press Institute delegation, the government confirmed that it is looking into passing freedom of information legislation before Botswana’s 2024 general election. It is hoped that the process will be inclusive and consultations will include all stakeholders to ensure that it can be effectively implemented and reflects established and universally accepted access to information standards. Of notable significance, during the period under review, was the government’s decision to repeal the contentious Media Practitioners Act and replace it with the Media Practitioners Association Act, which has been described as a threat to the freedom of the media as well as its independence. While it is being passed as a measure to shape and maintain high professional standards in journalism, it seeks to regulate the media. The law establishes a statutory media board, which will regulate journalists’ conduct and introduce a register of journalists and media enterprises in the country. Although the government will not be involved in the accreditation process, the mechanism being instituted can be manipulated by the government. “The Act reinforces Botswana criminal defamation laws by insisting these must be incorporated into the new code of ethics” reports the Daily Maverick.(6) MEDIA PLURALISM AND DIVERSITY With a population of 2.5 million people, Botswana’s media sector grapples with viability and sustainability issues. This is exacerbated by the fact that the government is the largest advertiser in this limited market and so advertising has been weaponised. With no criteria directing how the government distributes advertising, the authorities use this money “to reward friendly coverage and punish critical reporting”. There is little linguistic diversity and almost all print media is exclusively in English; except the state-owned Daily News, which publishes some of its content in Setswana. Radio and television are the two mediums that offer content in vernacular languages. What is of concern is the numerous lawsuits being initiated against journalists and media outlets. These strategic lawsuits against public participation are meant to tie up media outlets in a costly exercise, stifling critical voices and encouraging self-censorship. It also has a psychologically damaging impact on the journalists in question and the management team as it has the potential to financially cripple an outlet and force its closure. Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) have a detrimental impact on media diversity and media independence. 35