Is the broadcast media moratorium a ridiculous impediment on freedom of expression?

[Chris]

Whether or not people are in favor of it, or whether there is a very valid reason for doing so, is in my opinion irrelevant. The constitution states in Article 40:

6. The State guarantees liberty for the exercise of the following rights, subject to public order and morality:
i. The right of the citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions. 


The education of public opinion being, however, a matter of such grave import to the common good, the State shall endeavour to ensure that organs of public opinion, such as the radio, the press, the cinema, while preserving their rightful liberty of expression, including criticism of Government policy, shall not be used to undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State.


The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.

This means that the government cannot infringe on the right to free expression when a media outlet did not "undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State."
In my opinion the moratorium should require a referendum.

 

[Time]

It needs to be challenged in the courts.