A reading of the above article espouses expressions of inexactitude which are also so broad as to be capable of diverse subjective interpretations. It indeed amounts to censorship on publication. The jurisprudence of freedom of expression suggests that the erosion of freedom of expression by indirect means as the above provisions seem to have done suggests that a finding of violation is obvious. The existence of criminal defamation and insult or sedition laws are indeed inacceptable instances of gross violation of free speech and freedom of expression. It restricts the right of access to public information. This appears to be the intent of the laws of the Defendant on sedition. Restrictions on the freedom of speech must be couched in the narrowest possible terms to enable speakers appreciate the boundary between legality and illegality in their speeches/ actions. The UN Human Rights Committee recently issued its general comments No 34, which constitutes the most authoritative interpretation of the minimum standards guaranteed by article 19 of the ICCPPR. In particular, the committee highlighted a free and uncensored media as bedrock of a democratic society. The committee said; “A free, uncensored and unhindered press or other media is essential in any society to ensure freedom of opinion and expression and the enjoyment of other Covenant rights. It constitutes one of the cornerstones of a democratic society. The covenant embraces a right whereby the media may receive information on the basis which it can carry out its functions. The free communication of information and 37