professional journalism and the exercise of freedom of expression that the Court cannot accept. This argument assumes that it is possible to distinguish freedom of expression from the professional practice of journalism, which is not possible. Moreover, it implies serious dangers if carried to its logical conclusion. The practice of professional journalism cannot be differentiated from freedom of expression. On the contrary, both are obviously intertwined, for the professional journalist is not, nor can he be, anything but someone who has decided to exercise freedom of expression in a continuous, regular and paid manner.” The Court noted:“That licensing is a way to guarantee society an objective and truthful information by means of codes of professional responsibility and ethics, is an argument based on considerations of general welfare. But, in truth, as has been shown, general welfare requires the greatest possible amount of information, and it is the full exercise of the right of expression that benefits this general welfare. In principle, it would be a contradiction to invoke a restriction to freedom of expression as a means of guaranteeing it. Such an approach would ignore the primary and fundamental character of that right, which belongs to each and every individual as well as the public at large. A system of control of the right of expression on behalf of a supposed guarantee of the correctness and truthfulness of the information that society receives can be the source of great abuse and, in short, violates the right to information that this same society has.” It is obvious, therefore, that by embarking on this course of action, we will be inducing the breach of the provisions of our Constitution and international human rights law and destroying the very basis upon which we rely in asserting our own freedom. Working Out a Mechanism for Independent Self-Regulation There are certain basic principles which underpin any truly self-regulatory mechanism for the media. One of these principles is that the Government should not be involved in drawing up the regulations. The rationale for this is that since the Government is often at the receiving end of critical reports in the media, there is no doubt that most governments will be determined to find ways of either controlling the media or getting back at journalists or media establishments which have carried critical or unfavourable reports about them.