"It is unlikely that a few hours of freedom should cause irrevocable harm to the state's case. If we err, we err on the side of freedom."

With that a South African High Court judge released a journalist who had been arrested and held without charge after writing a story critical of the national police commissioner in the Sunday Times newspaper.

While the police were arresting this journalist, other journalists were, coincidentally, meeting to iron out recent threats to media freedom in the country...

The ruling party – the African National Congress – has proposed plans for a Media Appeals Tribunal (MAT) and a Protection of Information Bill as a replacement to media self-regulation.

What does this mean?

The MAT will be in place to make sure the media are legally held accountable for what they say. It has been proposed that this tribunal is appointed by parliament - an automatic conflict of interest. The Protection of Information Bill will mean some documents will become classified (for national security reasons) and if published the punishment is 25 years in jail.

The ANC says they’re doing this to make journalists behave responsibly. But journalists are not buying it; they say it’s an attempt to gag the press.

Some former newspaper editors in the country have gone as far as to say that the appointment of a statutory body will be the first step onto a “dark and evil” path.

What do others say?

“…a threat to the people of South Africa’s right to information and rigorous political debate…” - International Press Institute

“Such a tribunal relates to apartheid-style tactics where the media was told what to write and say.” - The National Press Club

If South Africa wants to keep its international credibility, it absolutely has to rethink this new policy... but for now it's a case of watch this space.

What do you think? Should governments have some control of the media?

See Marcus' mobile coverage from around World Cup in South Africa