Only when a court or independent authority identifies a serious security or legal justification, not because officials dislike critical coverage.

When objective and publicly available accreditation standards have been breached, provided affected journalists receive an opportunity to contest the decision.

For narrowly defined security concerns, with temporary limits and independent review to prevent the restriction becoming an informal punishment for unfavourable reporting.

When repeated and demonstrable professional misconduct occurs, but only after a transparent process distinguishes factual errors from legitimate political criticism.

Governments should have reasonable discretion over invitations to particular events, while maintaining broad and nondiscriminatory access to routine press briefings.

No established news organisation should lose ordinary briefing access for editorial decisions, because accountability requires the government to tolerate hostile questioning.