-45exercise of the freedom of expression by journalists in general and especially in the Applicant's capacity as a journalist. 165. Apart from serious and very exceptional circumstances for example, incitement to international crimes, public incitement to hatred, discrimination or violence or threats against a person or a group of people, because of specific criteria such as race, colour, religion or nationality, the Court is of the view that the violations of laws on freedom of speech and the press cannot be sanctioned by custodial sentences, without going contrary to the above provisions. 166. The Court further notes that other criminal sanctions, be they (fines), civil or administrative, are subject to the criteria of necessity and proportionality; which therefore implies that if such sanctions are disproportionate, or excessive, they are incompatible with the Charter and other relevant human rights instruments. ii). Consideration of allegations of violations relating to action by Burkinabe Courts 167. Regarding the sentencing of the Applicant by the Ouagadougou High Court to a twelve month term of imprisonment for defamation, contempt and insult, and the confirmation of that sentence by the Ouagadougou Court of Appeal, the Court recalls that it had already ruled that any custodial sentence relating to defamation is inconsistent with the Charter, the Covenant and the Revised ECOWAS Treaty. Consequently, the enforcement of such laws by the Burkinabe Courts also amounts to a violation of the relevant human rights provisions in this regard. At any rate, the Respondent State has not shown that such convictions were necessary and proportionate to protect the rights and reputation of Mr. Placide Nikiema. 168. Regarding the overall costs charged to the Applicant, in the Application, he contends that "this amounts to one more violation of his right to freedom of expression". He adds that the total amount of 6 Milliom CFA Francs (an equival