Gikunju,

It is not necessary to read the entire ruling for the subject thread considering the 4 min 14 second news clip summary of the 5 hour decison referenced the self-regulated, otherwise, professional editors at Citizen approved to be broadcast in the public court.

Horribly biased "cherry picking" news angles selected, the voice over speak "under the mercy of foreign signal distributors," the amount of airtime given to their own lawyers. Watch the powerful media houses owners lawyers define the future they want thus determined must be. Professionals in toto self-regulation bonus was achieved! According to the news clip... since this decision effectively expelled CCK from regulating them.

Please see the confusion this court has caused and its amplifcation through this type of reporting.

Should my news views be branded as anti-media freedom?

On Sunday, March 30, 2014 3:51 PM, "wgikunju@gmail.com" <wgikunju@gmail.com> wrote:

You're spreading false alarm ICT researcher, the Judges offered remedy for PANG, and directed that the government should comply with the Constitution to legally constitute a 'CCK' with authority to regulate the industry. Please read the judgement in full.
--WG
-----Original message-----
From: ICT Researcher
Sent: 30/03/2014, 3:10 pm
To: wgikunju@gmail.com
Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
Subject: [kictanet] Appeal Court Decision to anarchic sector

Just watching http://www.citizennews.co.ke/news/2012/local/item/18216-appeal-court-orders-digital-license-for-main-tv-stations

1. Declared CCK media regulatory role illegal
2. Court cancelled licensed earlier issued to PANG
3. Court awards 3 a license exempted from competitive bidding process
4. Court give license subject to same terms and conditions
5. Court rushes next year's switch off date to September this year

Since the court declared CCK illegal, will the same court assume implementation role including migration process?

Foreign investors in Kenya have cause to be very worried.