[3] This simply means that where a person has consented to the deprivation of the enjoyment of the right of expression he cannot then turn around and assert the right. Ironically, the Section of the South African Bill of Rights dealing with freedom of expression is couched differently from our Section 24. It does not create the exception as the case is with our Section 24 (2). [4] In Interpreting a Constitution His Lordship Zietsman J.A. in the Supreme Court Case of Khanyakezwe Mhlanga and Another V the Commissioner of Police and Another No. 12 of 2018, made reference to the Ugandan case of Rwanyarare and Another V Attorney General (2004) AHRLR 279, where the Uganda Court observed as follows: “The Constitution is to be looked at as a whole. It has to be read as an integrated whole with no one particular provision destroying another but each supporting the other. All provisions concerning an issue should be considered together so as to give effect to the purpose of the instrument………..” [5] The background to the Khanyakezwe case was whether Regulation 19 of the Police Regulations and Section 18 of the Prisons Act, 1964, whose effect was to take away the right of police officers and prison officers to form or be part of a trade union, was Constitutional or not. Both the High Court and the Supreme Court emphasised that Article 39 created an exception when it comes to the enjoyment of certain rights by disciplinary forces with the exception of the right to life, torture and protection from inhuman or degrading treatment. See Article 39 (3). [6] I am inclined to hold the view that Section 24 (2) cannot be interpreted to confer the freedom of expression in an absolute fashion. It says that unless you consent to the deprivation of the right, then you can freely enjoy it. It is this court’s considered view that the Applicant’s act of accepting the social media policy as part of the contract of employment amounted to him consenting to the deprivation of his enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression; and having done so, he cannot turn around and indirectly challenge it. 28