Preliminary objection dismissed;Violation of Art. 10;Just satisfaction reserved

Giovanni Bonello;Ján Šikuta;Josep Casadevall;Lech Garlicki;Nicolas Bratza;Rait Maruste;Stanislav Pavlovschi

“ FAC ” ( TRM ) was created by Presidential decree as a ORG - owned company on DATE , out of the previously existing ORG broadcasting body . ORG 's statutes were changed in DATE and again in DATE , when it was transformed into a public company ( see paragraphs CARDINAL , DATE and DATE below ) and was registered as such on DATE .

NORP In DATE a privately - owned NORP television station ( ORG ) began broadcasting nationally . Until that date , in addition to ORG , CARDINAL NORP public channel ( GPE CARDINAL ) and CARDINAL NORP public channel ( ORG ) could be viewed throughout GPE . GPE CARDINAL carried no local news and ORG introduced a daily CARDINAL NORP news bulletin in DATE . While , in DATE , PERCENT of GPE 's population was rural , cable television was available only in the big cities and the use of satellite television was largely undeveloped . According to the ORG , a survey commissioned by ORG ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) in DATE found that ORG was the most - watched channel in GPE and that ORG 's evening news bulletin was the favourite television programme of PERCENT of the population .

PERSON ( the first applicant ) had worked in television since DATE and was the Head of ORG DATE and editor and presenter of the evening news bulletin in NORP . She left ORG in DATE .

PERSON ( the second applicant ) edited and presented the TIME entertainment show , as well as ORG 's evening news bulletin and a programme dedicated to NORP culture . She joined ORG 's predecessor in DATE and was made redundant in DATE .

PERSON ( the third applicant ) was the editor - in - chief and presenter of a DATE TIME talk - show on cultural , social and political issues . He joined ORG 's predecessor in DATE and was dismissed by ORG in DATE but employed by ORG in DATE .

PERSON ( the fourth applicant ) was a senior editor in ORG and presented the evening news in LANGUAGE . He joined ORG in DATE and was made redundant in DATE .

PERSON ( the fifth applicant ) was a senior director of ORG and worked on the show presented by PERSON GPE . She joined ORG in DATE and was dismissed by ORG in DATE but employed by ORG in DATE .

PERSON ( the sixth applicant ) was the producer of several programmes and talk - shows within the Television Cultural Section . He joined ORG 's predecessor in DATE and was dismissed by ORG in DATE but employed by ORG in DATE .

Viorica Cucereanu - Bogatu ( the seventh applicant ) worked as a special correspondent in ORG . She joined ORG 's predecessor in DATE and was made redundant in DATE .

PERSON ( the eighth applicant ) was a senior editor and presenter in the Television Cultural Section , as well as producer and presenter of an entertainment show . She joined ORG 's predecessor in DATE and was made redundant in DATE .

Ludmila Vasilache ( the ninth applicant ) was an editor and presenter of several programmes within the Television Cultural Section . She joined ORG 's predecessor in DATE . She was dismissed by ORG in DATE but employed by ORG in DATE .

According to the applicants , ORG was subjected to political control throughout its existence . However , after DATE , when ORG won a large majority in the parliamentary elections , a number of senior managers at ORG were removed and their positions filled with persons loyal to the Government . The restrictions on journalistic freedom of expression allegedly then became acute .

The applicants alleged that the information disseminated on the news bulletins was strictly controlled by ORG 's senior management . Whereas it had formerly been part of the first applicant 's job to select news items and write the script for the part of the bulletin which she presented , after DATE this task was taken over by the Head of ORG , who would decide which items should be included on the basis of a schedule prepared by the ORG news agency “ ORG ” . The selection was submitted for approval to the President of ORG and ORG . Material covering parliamentary , governmental or presidential sessions as well as local visits by official bodies would be given priority .

Only a trusted group of journalists and technicians were used for interviews and reports of a political nature . Whereas before DATE the journalists had had a large measure of editorial control , they were now given instructions as to the tone and direction that the piece should take ; occasionally the entire script was dictated to them . Interviews and other reports which were not broadcast live were selected and edited to present the ruling party in a favourable light .

NORP In accordance with TRM policy , reports on the activities of pro - government bodies and officials would last TIME . Reports about other events would last between a maximum of QUANTITY . As a result CARDINAL of the time allocated to news bulletins would be dedicated to reports on Government issues . Any conflict within the country or events organised by the opposition , non - governmental organisations or people with views other than those held by the ruling party would not be reported . No opposition party had access to air - time and a “ black - list ” was composed of prominent persons from political , cultural and scientific life who did not support ORG and who were not , therefore , allowed access to TRM programmes . On the rare occasions when an opposition politician was given air - time , the interviews were truncated or the speech was overdubbed with journalistic comment or text provided by the Government news agency , ORG .

Programmes other than the news bulletins were also subject to censorship . Controversial topics were forbidden ; the identity of guests and studio audiences were controlled ; live and interactive programmes were avoided and incoming telephone calls were screened . The DATE broadcasting schedule had to be approved by ORG 's President . Programmes which he did not approve were omitted from the broadcasting schedule without prior notice to the viewers or the participants in the programme and without any explanation .

The applicants alleged that the use of words and phrases such as “ NORP ” , “ NORP language ” , “ PERSON ” , “ History of NORP ” , “ totalitarian regime ” were prohibited , as was any reference to historical periods such as the period between the CARDINAL World Wars , the organised famine in the GPE , the NORP regime , the GULAG deportations and the period of national revival of DATE .

The applicants identified a number of specific incidents during this period . These included a disciplinary measure brought against a journalist for using the expressions “ totalitarian NORP regime ” , “ NORP Government ” and “ FAC ” during a live report on Independence Day , CARDINAL DATE ; the cutting of an interview with PERSON , the first President of GPE , from a feature report on TIME news about Independence Day ; the reprimand of a journalist who recorded an interview with the President of ORG during which the interviewee said that “ in the period of the totalitarian regime churches were destroyed ” ; the cutting of an interview with the former Secretary General of ORG , ORG , on DATE , because he said that “ presently no light can be seen at the end of the tunnel ” when referring to the economic situation in GPE ; the deletion of a programme , due to be shown on DATE , about the late singers PERSON and PERSON ; the refusal to broadcast , on DATE , an interview with the parliamentarian PERSON regarding the replacement on the school curriculum of the subject “ History of the NORP ” by the “ History of GPE ” ; the refusal to allow any coverage of the opposition position during a report on DATE of a debate in ORG about the socio - political situation ; the censorship of a report of a press conference given by the deputy of the parliamentary faction “ FAC ” , criticising Government proposals for territorial - administrative reform ; the banning of reports about the ORG of GPE and Conferences organised by Historians because opinions about the “ History of NORP ” and the NORP language were expressed ; the banning , in DATE , of a feature report about the inauguration of ORG which was dedicated to the victims of the NORP repressions ; the banning of a feature report in DATE about Professor PERSON , because she referred to the NORP deportation of ethnic NORP ; the deletion , from a feature report in DATE about the late PERSON , of the title of his book “ The national conscience of the NORP ” ; a ban during DATE and DATE of any interview with clergymen of ORG .

On DATE the “ Bună Seara ” talk show , presented by the applicant PERSON , was to be dedicated to a discussion of the plan for the federalisation of GPE proposed by GPE . The guests on the show were PERSON , the representative of ORG in GPE , PERSON , the spokesman of ORG , and the CARDINAL leaders of the Parliamentary factions : PERSON ORG , Dumitru Braghiş and PERSON . PERSON was told by the President of TIME before the broadcast was due to start that he need not attend as the show had been cancelled . The production team and presenter were not informed . The representative of the FAC , PERSON and PERSON came to the studio . The public took their places and the show began . However , unknown to the participants , and without any explanation , it was not broadcast and a film was shown in its place . The journalists who had worked on it were subsequently interrogated by the police .

The Government did not take issue with the specific incidents identified above by the applicants . However , they asserted that opposition politicians had access to national television and that the DATE protests were reported , as shown by the texts of news programmes for the period DATE and for occasional dates in DATE , DATE and DATE . In addition , the published TV Guides showed the following broadcasts on TRM : on DATE , a programme entitled “ ORG Parties ” ; on DATE , a programme entitled “ Public Life ” , with the participation of the President of GPE ; and on DATE , “ ORG the Media ” , with the participation of PERSON , the leader of the NORP parliamentary faction , PERSON , the leader of the Parliamentary faction “ GPE Democrată ” , Mr PERSON , the leader of an extra - parliamentary party “ LOC ” , and other persons who were not representatives of any political parties .

Since DATE , to cater for the principal minority groups , ORG had broadcast programmes in CARDINAL languages , namely NORP , GPE , PERSON , NORP , NORP and LANGUAGE .

During the DATE electoral campaign , programmes such as “ The Opposition 's Hour ” and subsequently “ Counterpoint ” allowed the opposition to express their point of view for TIME every week . Outside the electoral period , the programme “ The Political Parties ' Platform ” provided TIME DATE for an opposition politician to address the public . Furthermore , since DATE , all debates in ORG had been broadcast on ORG 's television and radio channels .

From DATE the principal opposition party at that time , ORG , organised DATE demonstrations against the ORG 's decision to modify the school history curriculum and reintroduce the compulsory study of NORP . The demonstrations , in FAC outside the main Government building , involved CARDINAL of protesters ( see further ORG v. GPE , no . CARDINAL , ECHR CARDINAL-II ) .

According to the ORG , the demonstrations were reported in ORG bulletins , principally in feature reports by the applicant PERSON GPE . The applicants , however , alleged that coverage of the demonstrations was very limited and strictly controlled so that , in particular , it was forbidden to give any information about the reasons for the protests or the views expressed by the opposition during the parliamentary debate .

On DATE , CARDINAL members of staff at ORG signed the following declaration of protest :

“ We , the employees of ORG , note that after ORG victory in the elections , our freedom of expression has been impaired . Our viewers and listeners have been deprived of the right to accurate and impartial information . In fact , the authorities have restored , in national radio and television , NORP - style political censorship , prohibited by LAW . As a result ' GPE has become an instrument for brainwashing and the manipulation of public opinion , а mouthpiece of the ruling party . We protest against these totalitarian actions , which infringe the rights of television viewers , radio listeners and the freedom of the press as a whole . Breaches of democratic principles of this kind are dangerous , because they destabilise the political situation within our country . We express our solidarity with the actions of the demonstrators , aimed against the forced russification and deliberate destruction of the democratic system . We demand the abolition of censorship within ORG Teleradio - Moldova and respect for the people 's right to accurate , reliable and impartial information . We demand that the authorities respect the democratic and pro - NORP policy which the people of this country have chosen . ”

On DATE the declaration was forwarded to the news agencies and CARDINAL people gathered in front of the FAC headquarters to protest against political control . DATE , during the recording of the TIME news bulletin , the fourth applicant , PERSON , refused to read from the script which he had been given which omitted any mention of the protests outside the FAC headquarters . The news crew began to broadcast a report about the demonstrations but , after TIME , the bulletin was interrupted and replaced with a documentary film . Military personnel were summoned to the studio . PERSON was not permitted to present the NORP language news bulletin at TIME , because of her involvement in the protests .

On DATE a group of ORG staff decided to go on a “ go - slow ” strike and ORG was elected for that purpose . ORG sent ORG 's President and the Government a list of demands , including the abolition of censorship , and the editors and news - casters decided to start producing uncensored news bulletins . A group of CARDINAL demonstrators gathered outside the FAC building .

That TIME ( DATE ) , the President of GPE came to TRM and met with representatives of ORG . He stated that he was also opposed to censorship . However , he rejected a demand to offer the opposition TIME of air - time , on the ground that the demonstrations in FAC were illegal .

On DATE the fourth applicant , PERSON , included in the script of the TIME news bulletin an item about the response of ORG to certain declarations of the President of GPE and also an interview with the leader of ORG , PERSON PERSON . The Head of the News Section deleted these paragraphs from the script . During the programme , which was broadcast live , PERSON made allegations of censorship and held the redacted script up to camera . Immediately , the Section Head ordered the technician to cut the sound .

On DATE ORG created a special ORG to elaborate a “ strategy for improving the work of [ TRM ] ” .

Following the events of DATE , the first applicant , PERSON , who had formerly read the news in NORP every evening , was permitted to present it only CARDINAL or two evenings a week . On DATE , on the ground that she had made a mistake while reading the news , she was demoted from the position of editor and senior news - reader to that of a junior reporter and was no longer permitted to present the bulletin .

She brought employment proceedings against ORG and on DATE ORG held in her favour , ordering FAC to reinstate her in her previous position of news - reader . TRM did not , however , comply with the judgment and PERSON never got her former job back . She was not given enough work as a reporter and was allegedly subjected to harassment and censorship , to the point where she was no longer able to earn a living and had to resign on DATE . She then worked for a press agency and for another television company .

On DATE the fourth applicant , PERSON , was subjected to a disciplinary sanction in the form of a severe warning ( “ mustrare aspră ” ) for having departed from the authorised script of the news bulletin on his own initiative . In addition , he was demoted from his position of news - reader and deprived of the right to present any news programmes .

NORP He brought proceedings against FAC and , on DATE , ORG annulled the disciplinary sanction on the ground that Mr Rusnac did not appear to have breached any contractual obligation by departing from the script . It rejected his claim to be reinstated as news - reader , however , since it found that he had no contractual right to this position which he had filled on the basis of an oral agreement only . On DATE TRM withdraw the disciplinary sanction in compliance with ORG judgment .

DATE ORG ( “ ACC ” : see paragraph CARDINAL below ) organised a series of meetings with managers and staff at TRM to discuss the issue of censorship and other problems facing the company . On DATE the ORG published its conclusions , as follows :

“ Both the company 's administration and the staff expressed their interest and desire to find a rapid solution to the conflict , which had given rise to demands and the creation of a strike committee .

The discussions centred on CARDINAL general themes :

the politicised nature of ORG and the events that had occurred within [ TRM ] ;

social and administrative issues , with emphasis on the staff 's unrealised creative potential .

A long series of events led up to the strike . There had been a very high turnover of senior managers in the company 's central administration and departments , which had serious ramifications . Contrary to their contracts of employment , certain journalists and assistant directors stopped complying with instructions relating to the preparation and broadcasting of programmes , which led to a slipping of established standards and disregard for the rules and requirements of broadcasting . The political bias of certain television journalists is shown by the fact that a group of them immediately gave their support to the demonstrations at FAC organised by the parliamentary opposition party . Taking advantage of the situation this created , the journalists not only improperly breached professional procedures but also did their bit to aggravate the situation in the company by dividing the staff into CARDINAL camps : ' us ' and ' them ' .

... Disciplinary sanctions , including the withdrawal of the presenter 's licence , were imposed on the journalists who had violated broadcasting procedures . The biased statements of members of ORG were rejected by the majority of ORG staff . This led to the creation of ORG , which has no fewer members than ORG .

ORG action was not supported by ORG . The members of ORG presented demands not only to the company 's administration and the Government but also to ORG , without informing ORG .

With regard to the notions of ' censorship ' and ' application of censorship ' in the creative process , there was an attempt to qualify as ' censorship ' the basic requirements imposed by the duty to comply with the obligations of service . At the same time the notions of both ' external ' and ' internal ' censorship were broached .

In fact , they have tried to use the existence of censorship to justify their own poor quality work and lack of professionalism . Journalists have failed properly to perform the tasks which senior management , with the aim of producing impartial programmes , have entrusted to them . The basic requirements of professionalism are interpreted as a form of diktat or censorship . Nonetheless , it can not be ruled out that certain directors attempted to conduct their own live broadcasting in favour of the party line of the parliamentary majority . Attempts by representatives of ORG power to influence the message conveyed by programmes still persist , although the ORG does not have any concrete examples of this . It is easy to understand that this form of improper influence has led to protests on the part of creative staff . This is typical of television .

Thus , ' political censorship ' has been defined as a lack of professionalism on the part of certain directors regarding the organisation of the creative process . ' Political censorship ' has evolved into ' intellectual censorship ' .

It has also been observed that the company 's administration does not forbid the use of the words PERSON , NORP , LANGUAGE language , NORP history , or totalitarian regime in a historical context ; however , it does not allow their use in reports about current events . The demands of the members of ORG have been given air - time . ...

ORG 's Statute was subjected to the scrutiny of ORG before being adopted by the Government . However , certain ORG and provisions have not yet been reflected in ORG 's creative activity or in the relations between management and staff . The proposals to change ORG into a public institution are aspirational and do not have a financial basis . ...

So , the ORG , having examined the state of affairs in the ORG - owned company ORG , considers that

The permanent practice of changing directors and the exertion of pressure on creative staff , which is interpreted as the application of censorship , are incompatible with the activity of the creative workforce .

The Statute of the ORG - owned company ORG and the possible creation in the future of public posts in television and radio broadcasting should be publicly examined .

The provisions of the Statute must be strictly complied with by the company , whose responsibility it is to set up a collegial ORG .

The definitive decision regarding the provision of powerful equipment and funding , including remuneration , should be taken by ORG and the Government .

The Statute and composition of ORG , and the instructions for preparing and launching programmes must be re - examined . Provision must be made for permanent review of the legislation pertaining to the audiovisual sector and with full responsibility .

The procedures for the training and reorientation of staff must be revised , and training programmes organised in studios abroad . ”

On DATE the President of GPE made a statement to the press concerning TRM . He expressed his reservations as regards ORG urging the GPE authorities to transform ORG TRM into LAW ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) , but declared that he would accept ORG 's decision to make such a change .

On DATE ORG enacted Law no . CARDINAL-XV on ORG , “ FAC ” , by which ORG became a Public Company ( see paragraph CARDINAL below ) .

According to the new law , the staff of the old ORG had to pass an examination in order to be employed at ORG . ORG was appointed in DATE . The applicant PERSON was chosen to represent existing TRM staff in the Commission .

All the applicants sat the examination . The results were made public on DATE . PERSON , PERSON , FAC , and PERSON failed to be confirmed in their posts , together with a large number of the persons who had been active during DATE strike . PERSON resigned from ORG in protest .

On DATE the journalists who had not been retained in post organised a press conference at which they contended that they had been dismissed for political reasons . A feature report about that press conference was scheduled for the TIME news bulletin . However , the President of ORG took the decision to broadcast a nature documentary instead .

On DATE , the President of TRM issued an order by which CARDINAL of the individuals who had taken part in the press - conference , including CARDINAL of the applicants , were banned from entering FAC premises . The journalists and their supporters continued their protest outside the FAC building for DATE .

The applicants PERSON , PERSON , PERSON and DATE other individuals complained to ORG about the unlawfulness of the reinstatement procedure , claiming in particular that ORG had been unlawfully constituted .

By a judgment of DATE ORG dismissed the action as unfounded . It found , inter alia , that ORG had been constituted pursuant to LAW . CARDINAL-XV of DATE , and that this PERSON did not grant the applicants any specific rights as to the organisation of the examination . TRM had acted within its discretionary powers under the law and there was no right to challenge legislative provisions .

On DATE ORG dismissed the appeal as unfounded .

At FAC in GPE , DATE , ORG adopted the following resolutions :

Resolution No . CARDINAL on ORG

“ ... Acknowledging that public service broadcasting , both radio and television , support the values underlying the political , legal and social structures of democratic societies , and in particular respect for human rights , culture and political pluralism ;

Stressing the importance of public service broadcasting for democratic societies ;

Recognising therefore the need to guarantee the permanence and stability of public service broadcasting so as to allow it to continue to operate in the service of the public ;

Underlining the vital function of public service broadcasting as an essential factor of pluralistic communication accessible to everyone ;

Recalling the importance of radio and stressing its great potential for the development of democratic societies , particularly at the regional and local levels ;

I. General principles

Affirm their commitment to maintain and develop a strong public service broadcasting system in an environment characterised by an increasingly competitive offer of programme services and rapid technological change ;

Acknowledge , in line with the conclusions adopted at DATE European Ministerial Conference , that privately owned companies as well as public organisations may provide such a service ;

Undertake to guarantee CARDINAL comprehensive wide - range programme service comprising information , education , culture and entertainment which is accessible to all members of the public , while acknowledging that public service broadcasters must also be permitted to provide , where appropriate , additional programme services such as thematic services ;

Undertake to define clearly , in accordance with appropriate arrangements in domestic law and practice and in respect for their international obligations , the role , missions and responsibilities of public service broadcasters and to ensure their editorial independence against political and economic interference ;

Undertake to guarantee public service broadcasters secure and appropriate means necessary for the fulfilment of their missions ;

Agree to implement these commitments in accordance with the following framework :

II . Policy framework for public service broadcasting

Public service requirements

ORG agree that public service broadcasters , within the general framework defined for them and without prejudice to more specific public service remits , must have principally the following missions :

- to provide , through their programming , a reference point for all members of the public and a factor for social cohesion and integration of all individuals , groups and communities . In particular , they must reject any cultural , sexual , religious or racial discrimination and any form of social segregation ;

- to provide a forum for public discussion in which as broad a spectrum as possible of views and opinions can be expressed ;

- to broadcast impartial and independent news , information and comment ;

- to develop pluralistic , innovatory and varied programming which meets high ethical and quality standards and not to sacrifice the pursuit of quality to market forces ;

- to develop and structure programme schedules and services of interest to a wide public while being attentive to the needs of minority groups ;

- to reflect the different philosophical ideas and religious beliefs in society , with the aim of strengthening mutual understanding and tolerance and promoting community relations in pluriethnic and multicultural societies ;

- to contribute actively through their programming to a greater appreciation and dissemination of the diversity of national and NORP cultural heritage ;

- to ensure that the programmes offered contain a significant proportion of original productions , especially feature films , drama and other creative works , and to have regard to the need to use independent producers and co - operate with the cinema sector ;

- to extend the choice available to viewers and listeners by also offering programme services which are not normally provided by commercial broadcasters .

Funding

Participating states undertake to maintain and , where necessary , establish an appropriate and secure funding framework which guarantees public service broadcasters the means necessary to accomplish their missions . There exist a number of sources of funding for sustaining and promoting public service broadcasting , such as : licence fees , public subsidies , advertising and sponsorship revenue ; sales of their audio - visual works and programme agreements . Where appropriate , funding may also be provided from charges for thematic services offered as a complement to the basic service .

The level of licence fee or public subsidy should be projected over a sufficient period of time so as to allow public service broadcasters to engage in long term planning .

Economic practices

Participating states should endeavour to ensure that economic practices such as the concentration of media ownership , the acquisition of exclusive rights and the control over distribution systems such as conditional access techniques , do not prejudice the vital contribution public service broadcasters have to make to pluralism and the right of the public to receive information .

GPE and accountability

Participating states undertake to guarantee the independence of public service broadcasters against political and economic interference . In particular , day to day management and editorial responsibility for programme schedules and the content of programmes must be a matter entirely for the broadcasters themselves .

The independence of public service broadcasters must be guaranteed by appropriate structures such as pluralistic internal boards or other independent bodies .

The control and accountability of public service broadcasters , especially as regards the discharge of their missions and use of their resources , must be guaranteed by appropriate means .

Public service broadcasters must be directly accountable to the public . To that end , public service broadcasters should regularly publish information on their activities and develop procedures for allowing viewers and listeners to comment on the way in which they carry out their missions . ...

Participating states , together with public service broadcasters , should examine at regular intervals at the NORP level the impact of technological change on the role of public service broadcasting at both the national and transnational levels .

In DATE ORG no . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL , on “ ORG ” , which stated as follows :

“ ORG , under the terms of Article CARDINAL.b of the Statute of the Council of Europe ,

Considering that the aim of ORG is to achieve a greater unity between its members for the purpose of safeguarding and realising the ideals and principles which are their common heritage ;

Recalling that the independence of the media , including broadcasting , is essential for the functioning of a NORP society ;

Stressing the importance which it attaches to respect for media independence , especially by governments ;

Recalling in this respect the principles endorsed by the governments of the member states of ORG set out in the declaration on freedom of expression and information of CARDINAL DATE , especially as regards the need for a wide range of independent and autonomous means of communication allowing for the reflection of a diversity of ideas and opinions ;

Reaffirming the vital role of public service broadcasting as an essential factor of pluralistic communication which is accessible to everyone at both national and regional levels , through the provision of a basic comprehensive programme service comprising information , education , culture and entertainment ;

Recalling the commitments accepted by the representatives of the states participating in the CARDINALth European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy ( Prague , DATE ) in the framework of Resolution No . CARDINAL on the future of public service broadcasting , especially respect for the independence of public service broadcasting organisations ;

Noting the need to develop further the principles on the independence of public service broadcasting set out in the aforementioned GPE resolution in the light of the challenges raised by political , economic and technological change in LOC ;

Considering that , in the light of these challenges , the independence of public service broadcasting should be guaranteed expressly at the national level by means of a body of rules dealing with all aspects of its functioning ;

Underlining the importance of ensuring strict respect for these rules by any person or authority external to public service broadcasting organisations ,

Recommends the governments of the member states :

a. to include in their domestic law or in instruments governing public service broadcasting organisations provisions guaranteeing their independence in accordance with the guidelines set out in the appendix to this recommendation ;

b. to bring these guidelines to the attention of authorities responsible for supervising the activities of public service broadcasting organisations as well as to the attention of the management and staff of such organisations .

Appendix to Recommendation No . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL

Guidelines on the guarantee of the independence of public service broadcasting

I. General provisions

The legal framework governing public service broadcasting organisations should clearly stipulate their editorial independence and institutional autonomy , especially in areas such as :

- the definition of programme schedules ;

- the conception and production of programmes ;

- the editing and presentation of news and current affairs programmes ;

- the organisation of the activities of the service ;

- recruitment , employment and staff management within the service ;

- the purchase , hire , sale and use of goods and services ;

- the management of financial resources ;

- the preparation and execution of the budget ;

- the negotiation , preparation and signature of legal acts relating to the operation of the service ;

- the representation of the service in legal proceedings as well as with respect to third parties .

The provisions relating to the responsibility and supervision of public service broadcasting organisations and their statutory organs should be clearly defined in the governing legal framework .

The programming activities of public service broadcasting organisations shall not be subject to any form of censorship .

No a priori control of the activities of public service broadcasting organisations shall be exercised by external persons or bodies except in exceptional cases provided for by law .

II . Boards of management of public service broadcasting organisations

Competences

The legal framework governing public service broadcasting organisations should stipulate that their boards of management are solely responsible for DATE operation of their organisation .

Status

The rules governing the status of the boards of management of public service broadcasting organisations , especially their membership , should be defined in a manner which avoids placing the boards at risk of any political or other interference .

These rules should , in particular , stipulate that the members of boards of management or persons assuming such functions in an individual capacity :

- exercise their functions strictly in the interests of the public service broadcasting organisation which they represent and manage ;

- may not , directly or indirectly , exercise functions , receive payment or hold interests in enterprises or other organisations in media or media - related sectors where this would lead to a conflict of interest with the management functions which they exercise in their public service broadcasting organisation ;

- may not receive any mandate or take instructions from any person or body whatsoever other than the bodies or individuals responsible for the supervision of the public service broadcasting organisation in question , subject to exceptional cases provided for by law .

Responsibilities

Subject to their accountability to the courts for the exercise of their competences in cases provided for by law , the boards of management of public service broadcasting organisations , or individuals assuming such functions in an individual capacity , should only be accountable for the exercise of their functions to the supervisory body of their public service broadcasting organisation .

Any decision taken by the aforementioned supervisory bodies against members of the boards of management of public service broadcasting organisations or persons assuming such functions in an individual capacity for breach of their duties and obligations should be duly reasoned and subject to appeal to the competent courts .

III . Supervisory bodies of public service broadcasting organisations

Competences

The legal framework governing public service broadcasting organisations should define clearly and precisely the competences of their supervisory bodies .

The supervisory bodies of public service broadcasting organisations should not exercise any a priori control over programming .

Status

The rules governing the status of the supervisory bodies of public service broadcasting organisations , especially their membership , should be defined in a way which avoids placing the bodies at risk of political or other interference .

These rules should , in particular , guarantee that the members of the supervisory bodies :

- are appointed in an open and pluralistic manner ;

- represent collectively the interests of society in general ;

- may not receive any mandate or take any instructions from any person or body other than the one which appointed them , subject to any contrary provisions prescribed by law in exceptional cases ;

- may not be dismissed , suspended or replaced during their term of office by any person or body other than the one which appointed them , except where the supervisory body has duly certified that they are incapable of or have been prevented from exercising their functions ;

- may not , directly or indirectly , exercise functions , receive payment or hold interests in enterprises or other organisations in media or media - related sectors where this would lead to a conflict of interest with their functions within the supervisory body .

Rules on the payment of members of the supervisory bodies of public service broadcasting organisations should be defined in a clear and open manner by the texts governing these bodies .

IV . NORP Staff of public service broadcasting organisations

The recruitment , promotion and transfer as well as the rights and obligations of the staff of public service broadcasting organisations should not depend on origin , sex , opinions or political , philosophical or religious beliefs or trade union membership .

The staff of public service broadcasting organisations should be guaranteed without discrimination the right to take part in trade union activities and to strike , subject to any restrictions laid down by law to guarantee the continuity of the public service or other legitimate reasons .

The legal framework governing public service broadcasting organisations should clearly stipulate that the staff of these organisations may not take any instructions whatsoever from individuals or bodies outside the organisation employing them without the agreement of the board of management of the organisation , subject to the competences of the supervisory bodies .

V. Funding of public service broadcasting organisations

The rules governing the funding of public service broadcasting organisations should be based on the principle that member states undertake to maintain and , where necessary , establish an appropriate , secure and transparent funding framework which guarantees public service broadcasting organisations the means necessary to accomplish their missions .

The following principles should apply in cases where the funding of a public service broadcasting organisation is based either entirely or in part on a regular or exceptional contribution from the state budget or on a licence fee :

- the decision - making power of authorities external to the public service broadcasting organisation in question regarding its funding should not be used to exert , directly or indirectly , any influence over the editorial independence and institutional autonomy of the organisation ;

- the level of the contribution or licence fee should be fixed after consultation with the public service broadcasting organisation concerned , taking account of trends in the costs of its activities , and in a way which allows the organisation to carry out fully its various missions ;

- payment of the contribution or licence fee should be made in a way which guarantees the continuity of the activities of the public service broadcasting organisation and which allows it to engage in long - term planning ;

- the use of the contribution or licence fee by the public service broadcasting organisation should respect the principle of independence and autonomy mentioned in guideline No . CARDINAL ;

- where the contribution or licence fee revenue has to be shared among several public service broadcasting organisations , this should be done in a way which satisfies in an equitable manner the needs of each organisation .

The rules on the financial supervision of public service broadcasting organisations should not prejudice their independence in programming matters as stated in guideline No . CARDINAL .

VI . The programming policy of public service broadcasting organisations

The legal framework governing public service broadcasting organisations should clearly stipulate that they shall ensure that news programmes fairly present facts and events and encourage the free formation of opinions .

The cases in which public service broadcasting organisations may be compelled to broadcast official messages , declarations or communications , or to report on the acts or decisions of public authorities , or to grant airtime to such authorities , should be confined to exceptional circumstances expressly laid down in laws or regulations .

Any official announcements should be clearly described as such and should be broadcast under the sole responsibility of the commissioning authority .

VII . Access by public service broadcasting organisations to new communications technologies

Public service broadcasting organisations should be able to exploit new communications technologies and , where authorised , to develop new services based on such technologies in order to fulfil in an independent manner their missions as defined by law . ”

In DATE ORG on “ The Independence and Functions of Regulatory Authorities for the Broadcasting Sector ” which , inter alia , emphasised that to guarantee the existence of a wide range of independent and autonomous media in the broadcasting sector , it was essential to provide for adequate and proportionate regulation , in order to guarantee the freedom of the media whilst at the same time ensuring a balance between that freedom and other legitimate rights and interests . ORG therefore recommended that Member States should :

“ a. establish , if they have not already done so , independent regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector ;

b. include provisions in their legislation and measures in their policies entrusting the regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector with powers which enable them to fulfil their missions , as prescribed by national law , in an effective , independent and transparent manner , in accordance with the guidelines set out in the appendix to this recommendation ;

c. bring these guidelines to the attention of the regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector , public authorities and professional groups concerned , as well as to the general public , while ensuring the effective respect of the independence of the regulatory authorities with regard to any interference in their activities .

Appendix to Recommendation Rec(CARDINAL)CARDINAL

Guidelines concerning the independence and functions of regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector

I. General legislative framework

Member states should ensure the establishment and unimpeded functioning of regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector by devising an appropriate legislative framework for this purpose . The rules and procedures governing or affecting the functioning of regulatory authorities should clearly affirm and protect their independence .

NORP The duties and powers of regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector , as well as the ways of making them accountable , the procedures for appointment of their members and the means of their funding should be clearly defined in law .

II . Appointment , composition and functioning

The rules governing regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector , especially their membership , are a key element of their independence . Therefore , they should be defined so as to protect them against any interference , in particular by political forces or economic interests .

For this purpose , specific rules should be defined as regards incompatibilities in order to avoid that :

- regulatory authorities are under the influence of political power ;

- members of regulatory authorities exercise functions or hold interests in enterprises or other organisations in the media or related sectors , which might lead to a conflict of interest in connection with membership of the regulatory authority .

Furthermore , rules should guarantee that the members of these authorities :

- are appointed in a democratic and transparent manner ;

- may not receive any mandate or take any instructions from any person or body ;

- do not make any statement or undertake any action which may prejudice the independence of their functions and do not take any advantage of them .

Finally , precise rules should be defined as regards the possibility to dismiss members of regulatory authorities so as to avoid that dismissal be used as a means of political pressure .

NORP In particular , dismissal should only be possible in case of non - respect of the rules of incompatibility with which they must comply or incapacity to exercise their functions duly noted , without prejudice to the possibility for the person concerned to appeal to the courts against the dismissal . Furthermore , dismissal on the grounds of an offence connected or not with their functions should only be possible in serious instances clearly defined by law , subject to a final sentence by a court .

Given the broadcasting sector 's specific nature and the peculiarities of their missions , regulatory authorities should include experts in the areas which fall within their competence .

III . Financial independence

Arrangements for the funding of regulatory authorities - another key element in their independence - should be specified in law in accordance with a clearly defined plan , with reference to the estimated cost of the regulatory authorities ' activities , so as to allow them to carry out their functions fully and independently .

Public authorities should not use their financial decision - making power to interfere with the independence of regulatory authorities . Furthermore , recourse to the services or expertise of the national administration or third parties should not affect their independence .

Funding arrangements should take advantage , where appropriate , of mechanisms which do not depend on ad - hoc decision - making of public or private bodies .

IV . Powers and competence

Regulatory powers

Subject to clearly defined delegation by the legislator , regulatory authorities should have the power to adopt regulations and guidelines concerning broadcasting activities . Within the framework of the law , they should also have the power to adopt internal rules .

Monitoring broadcasters ' compliance with their commitments and obligations

Another essential function of regulatory authorities should be monitoring compliance with the conditions laid down in law and in the licences granted to broadcasters . They should , in particular , ensure that broadcasters who fall within their jurisdiction respect the basic principles laid down in LAW , and in particular those defined in DATE .

Regulatory authorities should not exercise a priori control over programming and the monitoring of programmes should therefore always take place after the broadcasting of programmes .

Regulatory authorities should be given the right to request and receive information from broadcasters in so far as this is necessary for the performance of their tasks .

Regulatory authorities should have the power to consider complaints , within their field of competence , concerning the broadcasters ' activity and to publish their conclusions regularly .

When a broadcaster fails to respect the law or the conditions specified in his licence , the regulatory authorities should have the power to impose sanctions , in accordance with the law .

A range of sanctions which have to be prescribed by law should be available , starting with a warning . Sanctions should be proportionate and should not be decided upon until the broadcaster in question has been given an opportunity to be heard . All sanctions should also be open to review by the competent jurisdictions according to national law .

Powers in relation to public service broadcasters

Regulatory authorities may also be given the mission to carry out tasks often incumbent on specific supervisory bodies of public service broadcasting organisations , while at the same time respecting their editorial independence and their institutional autonomy .

V. Accountability

Regulatory authorities should be accountable to the public for their activities , and should , for example , publish regular or ad hoc reports relevant to their work or the exercise of their missions .

NORP In order to protect the regulatory authorities ' independence , whilst at the same time making them accountable for their activities , it is necessary that they should be supervised only in respect of the lawfulness of their activities , and the correctness and transparency of their financial activities . With respect to the legality of their activities , this supervision should be exercised a posteriori only . The regulations on responsibility and supervision of the regulatory authorities should be clearly defined in the laws applying to them .

All decisions taken and regulations adopted by the regulatory authorities should be :

- duly reasoned , in accordance with national law ;

- open to review by the competent jurisdictions according to national law ;

- made available to the public . ”

On DATE ORG adopted a “ Declaration on the guarantee of the independence of public service broadcasting in the member states ” which provided as follows ( footnotes omitted ) :

“ Recalling the commitment of member states to the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information , as guaranteed by LAW ) ;

Recalling , in particular , the importance of freedom of expression and information as a cornerstone of democratic and pluralist society , as underlined in the relevant case law of ORG and , in this context , stressing the importance of the existence of a wide variety of independent and autonomous media , permitting the reflection of diversity of ideas and opinions , as stated in ORG on freedom of expression and information of DATE ;

Highlighting the specific remit of public service broadcasting and reaffirming its vital role as an essential element of pluralist communication and of social cohesion which , through the provision of comprehensive programme services accessible to everyone , comprising information , education , culture and entertainment , seeks to promote the values of modern democratic societies and , in particular , respect for human rights , cultural diversity and political pluralism ;

Reiterating the objective to ensure the absence of any arbitrary controls or constraints on participants in the information process , on media content or on the transmission and dissemination of information , as stated in the LAW on the freedom of expression and information ;

Bearing in mind the undertaking made at the CARDINALth European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy ( Prague , DATE ) to guarantee the independence of public service broadcasters against any political and economic interference and , more particularly , recalling Recommendation No . R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL on the guarantee of the independence of public service broadcasting ;

Considering that the editorial independence and institutional autonomy of public service broadcasting , including through an appropriate , secure and transparent funding framework , should be guaranteed by means of a coherent policy and an adequate legal framework , and ensured by the effective implementation of the said policy and framework ;

Welcoming the situation which prevails in those member states where the independence of public service broadcasting is solidly entrenched through the regulatory framework and scrupulously respected in practice , as well as the progress being made in other member states towards securing such independence ;

Noting the concern expressed by ORG of ORG in its Recommendation CARDINAL ( DATE ) on public service broadcasting that the fundamental principle of the independence of public service broadcasting contained in Recommendation No . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL is still not firmly established in a number of member states ;

Bearing in mind the texts adopted at the CARDINALth ORG on Mass Media Policy ( GPE , DATE ) , in particular the Ministers ' call for the monitoring of the implementation by member states of ORG . R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL , and taking note , in this connection , of the overview contained in the appendix hereto concerning the situation in member states ;

Regretting developments in a few member states that tend to weaken the guarantee of independence of public service broadcasting or lessen the independence that had already been attained , and expressing concern about the slow or insignificant progress being made in certain other member states towards securing independent public service broadcasting , be it as a result of an inadequate regulatory framework or the failure to apply in practice existing laws and regulations ,

I. Reiterates its firm attachment to the objectives of editorial independence and institutional autonomy of public service broadcasting organisations in member states ;

II . Calls on member states to :

- implement , if they have not yet done so , Recommendation No . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL on the guarantee of the independence of public service broadcasting , with particular reference to the guidelines appended thereto , and having regard to the opportunities and challenges brought about by the information society , as well as by political , economic and technological changes in LOC ;

- provide the legal , political , financial , technical and other means necessary to ensure genuine editorial independence and institutional autonomy of public service broadcasting organisations , so as to remove any risk of political or economic interference ;

- disseminate widely the present declaration and , in particular , bring it to the attention of the relevant authorities and of public service broadcasting organisations , as well as to other interested professional and industrial circles ;

III . Invites public service broadcasters to be conscious of their particular remit in a NORP society as an essential element of pluralist communication and of social cohesion , which should offer a wide range of programmes and services to all sectors of the public , to be attentive to the conditions required in order to fulfil that remit in a fully independent manner and , to this end , to elaborate and adopt or , if appropriate , review , and to respect codes of professional ethics or internal guidelines .

Appendix to the Declaration

Introduction

NORP By decision of DATE , ORG instructed ORG on ORG ) , which subsequently became ORG on the Media and ORG ( ORG ) , inter alia to look into ' the independence of the public broadcasting service ' .

The Ministers participating in the CARDINALth ORG on Mass Media Policy ( GPE , DATE ) also requested that ORG monitor the implementation by member states of ORG . R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL of ORG on the guarantee of the independence of public service broadcasting , with a view , if necessary , to providing further guidance to member states on how to secure this independence ' .

This appendix contains an overview on the independence of public service broadcasting organisations in member states . The appendix and ORG declaration that precedes it have been prepared under the authority of the ORG by its subordinate ORG on public service broadcasting in the information society ( ORG PSB ) in response to the above - mentioned instructions and request .

This appendix is based on ORG documents as well as on information available from a variety of other sources , including international and non - governmental organisations . Its purpose is to give an overview of the complex and diverse situation in ORG member states and to identify areas where national audiovisual or media policies , as well as legal , institutional or financial frameworks for public service broadcasting resulting from these policies , may need to be re - examined to become better aligned with ORG .

Legal framework

According to Recommendation No . R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL , the legal framework governing public service broadcasting organisations should clearly stipulate their independence . The general provisions in Part I of the appendix to that recommendation highlight a number of issues requiring appropriate regulations in order to guarantee that independence . Specific reference is made to the need to regulate the responsibility and supervision of public service broadcasting organisations and of their statutory organs , and to the requirement that there be no form of undue interference in the form of censorship and a priori control of their activities .

Almost all ORG member states have established legal frameworks governing public service broadcasting , in a few cases with a clear constitutional basis . The latter reflects the understanding that the legal basis of public service broadcasting should be subject to broad consensus .

Many of those legal frameworks can be regarded as meeting ORG , in particular to the extent that they declare the editorial independence and institutional autonomy of public service broadcasting organisations and set out rules for the establishment , membership and operation of their governing and supervisory bodies . Some of those regulatory frameworks and the manner in which they are applied in practice are fully consistent with ORG on the subject and , on occasion , can even be characterised as exemplary .

By contrast , in a number of ORG member states , legal frameworks for public service broadcasting organisations are unclear or incomplete . In some cases , the applicable regulations are not capable of guaranteeing editorial independence and institutional autonomy of public service broadcasters , whether as a result of the tenor of substantive provisions or of the weakness or absence of mechanisms designed to ensure their application .

Reportedly , in some cases , while relevant provisions may be adequate , they are disregarded in practice , leaving public service broadcasting organisation under the effective control of the government or political bodies or formations , serving the interests of those bodies rather than society at large .

On occasion , the provisions relating to governing or supervisory bodies ( as , for example , regarding the selection , appointment and termination of appointment of members ) entail a risk of interference . In this connection , complaints have been voiced to the effect that proposed or actual changes to the regulatory framework in a few member states curtail the independence of public service broadcasters ' governing and/or supervisory bodies .

Public service remit

Resolution No . CARDINAL on the future of public service broadcasting , adopted at the CARDINALth European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy ( Prague , DATE ) , summarises the main missions of public service broadcasters . In this context , it should be recalled that Recommendation Rec(CARDINAL)CARDINAL on measures to promote the democratic and social contribution of digital broadcasting states that ' public service broadcasting should preserve its special social remit , including a basic general service that offers news , educational , cultural and entertainment programmes aimed at different categories of the public ' .

Further , the above - mentioned Resolution No . CARDINAL includes an undertaking ' to define clearly , in accordance with appropriate arrangements in domestic law and practice and in respect for their international obligations , the role , missions and responsibilities of public service broadcasters and to ensure their editorial independence against political and economic interference ' .

In the media context , a genuine public service presupposes the independence of the organisations entrusted with the delivery of that service . It also involves the ability , in terms of legal provisions and material possibilities , to adapt to changing circumstances . This close link between public service remit and independence is the guiding principle behind Recommendation No . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL .

In practically all ORG member states , the relevant legal frameworks address the question of public service remit .

While there is great diversity in the approach followed ( for example , as to the degree of detail provided , reflecting each country 's broadcasting strategy and policies , as well as the cultural , economic or political context , mostly by defining it in a clear and comprehensive manner ) , the determination of the remit of public service broadcasting organisations can on the whole be regarded as satisfactory . In some cases , the public service broadcasting organisations ' purpose is particularly well defined , both in terms of immediate aims and the manner in which those aims should be achieved , as well as envisaged future developments ( for example , in view of the new information and communication technologies ( ITCs ) ) .

By contrast , in some member states , the remit of public service media is unclear or difficult to apply . This has not paved the way to offering quality services of public interest ( for example , balanced / impartial news programmes ; education and learning ; investigative journalism ; ensuring pluralism and diversity in the media ; minority and local / community programmes ; offering quality entertainment ; and promoting creativity ) which have traditionally distinguished public service broadcasting organisations from commercial ones .

There has been criticism that , in certain countries , the distinction between public service and commercial broadcasting has become increasingly blurred , leading to what is called ' programme convergence ' , to the detriment of the quality of the programmes offered by the former . While it is important for public service broadcasters to offer entertainment programmes and to seek to reach wide audiences , the distinctiveness of public service content as a whole , vis - à - vis commercial output , must also be ensured . Moreover , on occasion , the public service broadcasters are not provided with the legal means or the material resources necessary for the adequate implementation of the public service entrusted to them . This situation can result in poor quality programmes or lead to over - reliance on mass - appeal and revenue - generating programmes , which is not in keeping with the public service remit .

It would appear that , in those countries where the situations described in the foregoing paragraph prevail , either there is little knowledge both among professionals and within society at large of the particular mission of public service broadcasters and understanding of the characteristics of public media , or proper performance of the public service mission is prevented by extraneous circumstances . In some of those countries , there would also seem to be a lack of experience as regards public service broadcasting , leading to widespread indifference regarding its role in a NORP society or a lack of confidence that genuine public service in the audiovisual area will be established and safeguarded .

Remedying these shortcomings , restoring or enhancing the legitimacy of public service broadcasting and , more particularly , raising awareness of and promoting the importance of such a service based on ORG standards is essential . The role of public authorities in this respect should not be underestimated .

As already indicated , in some member states , public service broadcasting organisations ' legal framework specifically permits them to adapt in light of developments ( for example , new communication technologies ) . In several member states , while this is not specifically foreseen in the legal framework , nothing prevents them from offering the public service entrusted to them using new formats or platforms . Progress in this area is to be welcomed . In other cases , however , existing provisions do not allow or are interpreted as an obstacle for such development .

Editorial independence

Article CARDINAL , paragraph CARDINAL , of ORG stipulates that ' everyone has the right to freedom of expression . This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority ... ' . In its case law , ORG has repeatedly underlined the importance of this right with regard to freedom of the media and editorial independence .

ORG has developed further standards reinforcing freedom of the media and editorial independence .

In its LAW on freedom of expression and information , adopted on DATE , ORG underlined the objective to ensure the absence of any arbitrary controls or constraints on participants in the information process , on media content or on the transmission and dissemination of information . Further , at the CARDINALth European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy , Council of Europe member states undertook to guarantee the independence of public service broadcasters against political and economic interference . These commitments and objectives have been reiterated in a number of other ORG documents , and are also at the origin of Recommendation No . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL .

More particularly , in Part I , Recommendation No . R ( CARDINAL)CARDINAL stipulates that the legal framework governing public service broadcasting organisations should provide for their editorial independence , offers guidance designed to facilitate the guarantee of editorial independence and proscribes interference in the form of censorship or control of their activities .

As already indicated , the legal frameworks in many ORG member states make provision for the editorial independence of public service broadcasting organisations .

In practice , in a majority of member states , public service broadcasters enjoy editorial independence and institutional autonomy . It is generally acknowledged that , in those member states , interference with editorial independence would be met with a strong reaction from the public service broadcasting organisations concerned , as well as by other media , civil society and the public in general . In several member states , legal mechanisms have been set up to deal with such situations should they occur .

NORP However , in other cases , some public service broadcasting organisations reportedly face interference and pressure . Such allegations concern close ties between public service broadcasters and government , politicians or public or private entities , or the undue influence of such bodies or persons on public service broadcasting organisations , which compromise editorial independence . The situation during electoral periods and campaigns is often highlighted ; it is alleged that , during such periods , leverage over public broadcasters is used to ensure favourable coverage .

In some ORG member states , the process of transformation of state broadcasting organisations into genuine public service broadcasters has been slow or still is under way and has , on occasion , been more formal than real . In some countries , the influence of governments and politicians on broadcasting regulators or the broadcasting sector in general has been identified as the key impediment to building and ensuring a diverse , impartial and pluralistic broadcasting landscape . The undue influence of private actors has also on occasion been reported .

It might be added that , in some member states , there is a lack of tradition concerning self - regulation or co - regulation , the adoption of and compliance with editorial standards , and a general culture of objectivity and professionalism . Ethical codes and internal guidelines , which can greatly contribute to the independent functioning of public service broadcasters , have not yet been adopted in all member states experiencing the problems outlined above .

Funding

The question of resources available to public service broadcasting organisations is at the crux of the issue of their independence and their ability to fulfil their remit . This explains the undertakings made at the CARDINALth European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy ' to guarantee public service broadcasters secure and appropriate means necessary for the fulfilment of their missions ' and ' to maintain and , where necessary , establish an appropriate and secure funding framework which guarantees public service broadcasting organisations the means necessary to accomplish their missions ' , as well as the attention paid to the matter in Recommendation No . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL .

In some ORG member states , public service broadcasting organisations receive appropriate funding , be it in the form of direct contributions from the state , licence fees , income - generating activities or a combination of these sources .

Whichever approach is adopted , it can be implemented with due respect for the market . It is generally agreed that care should be taken so that funding of public service broadcasters does not affect competition on the audiovisual market to an extent which would be contrary to the common interest . That said , excessive reliance on income - generating activities , which is often caused by a lack of public funding , can have a negative impact on programming and , in consequence , on the fulfilment of the public service remit entrusted to the organisations concerned .

It is often advanced that there is some degree of correlation between the resources available to public service broadcasting organisations and the quality of the services rendered by them . However , the satisfactory delivery of public service and sound management can also be regarded as contributing to attracting adequate resources .

Reportedly , in other ORG member states , there is no appropriate , secure and transparent funding framework guaranteeing public service broadcasting organisations the means necessary to accomplish their remit . On occasion , funding commitments and mechanisms often represent mere statements of intention , without efforts being made to implement them in practice .

Concerns are also frequently expressed as regards the threat to the continuity of the activities of public service broadcasting organisations due to uncertainty of both short- and longer - term funding ( for example , as a result of lack of consultation on state contributions , difficulties arising from the fee collection system , failure to adjust contributions of licence fees in view of inflation ) or exposure to pressure from authorities with financial decision - making power and the resulting threat to editorial independence and institutional autonomy . In order to avoid such risks , especially in cases where public funding comes from the state budget , appropriate safeguards should be put in place .

Employee protection

The relevance of staff policy matters has also been recognised in Recommendation No . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL , which contains some references to recruitment and non - discrimination , associative activities and the right to engage in industrial action , and the requirement that staff be free from influence from outside the public service broadcasting organisation concerned .

It would appear that these criteria are met in many ORG member states , and that employee protection standards are generally respected .

NORP However , reportedly , in a number of ORG member states , such standards are not yet well - established , particularly where the media are concerned . This situation renders media professionals more exposed to political and economic influence and pressure and less committed to professional standards .

Complaints are sometimes made of discrimination or dismissal of journalists resulting from pressure brought to bear on management by outside persons or bodies , and allegations have been made to the effect that , in certain countries , under cover of the process of transformation of state broadcasting organisations into public service broadcasters , journalists who are thought to be too controversial or inquisitive have been dismissed .

Concern has also been expressed in respect of proposals to give responsibility for the management of staff issues in public service broadcasters or regulatory bodies to the government .

ORG , transparency and accountability

Due to its very nature , public service broadcasting should be accountable to society at large , both because it exists to serve the public in general and because , in most cases , it is financed at least partly from public resources ( for example , state contributions ) or from broadcasting fees , paid by the intended beneficiaries of the service . According to Resolution No . CARDINAL adopted at the CARDINALth European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy , ' public service broadcasters must be directly accountable to the public . To that end , public service broadcasters should regularly publish information on their activities and develop procedures for allowing viewers and listeners to comment on the way in which they carry out their missions ' .

It goes without saying that accountability is also desirable as regards the sound management of the resources available to public service broadcasting organisations .

NORP In most ORG member states , public service broadcasting organisations are relatively open and transparent .

Noteworthy examples of good practice as regards accountability concern some public service broadcasting organisations that engage very actively in seeking audience feedback with a view to assessing their own performance and review , when necessary , the services provided by them .

Many public service broadcasters publish relevant information on a regular basis , some being subject to statutory obligations to publishing DATE reports or submit such reports to parliament . This allows for desirable public scrutiny .

NORP However , in some cases , there is insufficient openness , transparency and accountability vis - à - vis society at large as to how public service broadcasting organisations implement their mission and use the ( public ) resources available to them . It has also been advanced that there are cases where , despite provisions concerning submission of an annual report to the national parliament , such a report is rarely the subject of scrutiny and real debate . ”

Under LAW ( Law no . CARDINAL-XIV of DATE ) , statutes and regulatory administrative decrees , orders and decisions of the President and the Government are not subject to judicial review ; they are subject to verification of their constitutionality . A review of constitutionality is undertaken only when ORG is seized of the matter ( section CARDINAL of LAW , PERSON no . CARDINAL-XIII , DATE ) . There is no direct access in the form of an individual petition to ORG . The persons and institutions entitled to refer a case to ORG are exhaustively listed in section CARDINAL of LAW and LAW , which provide as follows :

“ The following shall have the right to refer a case to ORG :

( a ) the President of GPE ;

( b ) the Government ;

( c ) the Minister of ORG ;

( d ) ORG ;

( e ) ORG ;

( f ) the Attorney General ;

( g ) a member of ORG ;

( h ) a parliamentary group ;

( i ) the ORG ;

( j ) ORG of GPE ( PERSON ) ... ”

Freedom of expression is guaranteed by the LAW , as follows :

( CARDINAL ) All citizens are guaranteed the freedom of opinion as well as the freedom of publicly expressing their thoughts and opinions by way of word , image or any other means possible .

( CARDINAL ) The exercise of freedom of expression may not harm the honour , dignity or the rights of other people to have and express their own opinions or judgments .

( CARDINAL ) The law shall forbid and prosecute all actions aimed at denying and slandering the ORG or the people . Instigations to sedition , war , aggression , ethnic , racial or religious hatred , the incitement to discrimination , territorial separatism , public violence , or other actions threatening constitutional order are also forbidden and liable to be prosecuted . ”

LAW ( Law no . CARDINAL of DATE ) set out standards for freedom of expression in audiovisual broadcasting , as follows :

( CARDINAL ) The audiovisual institutions shall not be subjected to censorship .

Freedom of audiovisual expression implies strict observance of the LAW and it can not be exercised to the detriment of another person 's dignity , honour , private life or image .

( CARDINAL ) The ORG shall guarantee all the necessary conditions for the activity of the public audiovisual institutions .

( CARDINAL ) The ORG shall guarantee the endowment of the public audiovisual institutions with the necessary technical equipment for their broadcasting .

A journalist from an audiovisual institution , who acts on its behalf , shall have the right :

( h ) to access to the courts at all levels .

The Act also set up ORG ( “ ACC ” ) :

( CARDINAL ) ORG shall be composed of CARDINAL members , appointed by :

( a ) the ORG – CARDINAL members ( including CARDINAL audiovisual specialist ) ;

( b ) the President of GPE – CARDINAL members ( including CARDINAL audiovisual specialist ) ;

( c ) the Government - CARDINAL members ( including CARDINAL specialist in telecommunications ) . ... ”

TRM was created on DATE by Presidential Decree no . DATE , which provided :

ORG is liquidated .

ORG GPE ' is created .

The administration of ORG GPE ' will be exercised by the President of the Company while the coordination of its activity will be carried out by ORG . ”

TRM 's Statute was amended by ORG No . CARDINAL of DATE on the Statute of the State Company “ GPE ” . This read :

The ORG is a public audiovisual institution . The creative and editorial activity of the Company shall be protected by law from interference by the public authorities and pressure from political parties .

' FAC shall have the status of ORG .

The founder of the Company is the Government , in the name of ORG . The activity of the Company shall be conducted by the ORG through ORG .

The Company shall have the following objectives :

To provide truthful and objective information about the socio - political , economic and cultural life of the country and the external relations of the ORG ;

To promote the interests of all strata of society , to propagate the values of peace and humanism , democratic values and respect for human rights ;

To create , accumulate , preserve and promote cultural and artistic values .

The creative and editorial activity of the Company shall be independent . Television and radio programmes shall be protected by law from interference by the public authorities and influence and pressure from any political party .

The Company shall be obliged :

To present in an objective and impartial manner the realities of national and international socio - political life ; to ensure the people 's right to information ; to promote the authentic values of the national culture , of the culture of the national minorities and of universal culture ;

To ensure freedom of expression , freedom of thought and freedom of circulation of information ;

To ensure respect for the rights of journalists in accordance with the national legislation and with international practice ; to ensure the presence of persons with different political and confessional views within its broadcasts ;

To give priority to and broadcast free of charge the press releases of ORG and President of GPE ...

The research and creation sub - units of the Company shall ensure a journalist 's right to an opinion and to his or her own position . The Company can not oblige a journalist to promote any ideas which are in contradiction with his or her moral values .

The programmes broadcast by the Company must not propagate war , aggression , ethnic , racial , class or religious hatred , violent anti - State actions , terrorism , public disobedience , territorial separatism or any ideas and opinions contrary to moral standards .

The President of the Company , the General Director of Television and the General Director of Radio shall be appointed by ORG , on the proposal of ORG or on its own initiative . The term of office shall be DATE . The Vice - President of the Company shall be appointed by ORG , on the proposal of the President of the Company for DATE .

The President of the Company shall :

ORG ; ...

Employ and dismiss the employees of the Company ;

Supervise the activity of ORG ; ...

ORG is a collegial and consultative administrative body of the Company . It shall be composed of CARDINAL members , who shall act in accordance with ORG .

The President of the Company shall automatically be a member of ORG . The other members shall be the representatives of the Government and of ORG . ”

On DATE ORG adopted Resolution CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) on “ The functioning of democratic institutions in GPE ” , which stated , inter alia :

“ CARDINAL . ORG expresses grave concern about the events which have been occurring in GPE since DATE and its anxiety about the continuous worsening and radicalisation of the political climate there , which is a threat to the country 's stability .

Demonstrations organised by ORG ( ORG ) have been going on now in the town centre of GPE for CARDINAL - and - a - half months . ...

The ORG notes that the scale of the protest movement by journalists and staff of ORG underlines the need to carry out reforms quickly , so as to fully guarantee freedom of expression and promote a public broadcasting service . It urges the authorities to end the practice of censorship of television programmes and to afford all opposition political parties , both inside and outside parliament , generous access to discussion programmes . It asks ORG and ORG to embark without delay on work to transform ORG into an independent public corporation . ...

The ORG expects the NORP political forces to pursue genuine , constructive dialogue and to agree on a compromise which should include the following elements : ...

iv . the revision of radio / television legislation and amendment of the status of ORG to make it an independent public corporation ; an immediate start of work by the relevant parliamentary committee ; the possible resumption of consideration of the draft legislation examined by the previous legislature ; ... [ completion of work ] by the end of the current parliamentary LAW , on DATE ;

The ORG calls upon ORG and ORG to take the above measures without delay . ...

The ORG calls upon the NORP authorities to co - operate fully with ORG and its bodies , and in particular : ...

ii . to submit for ORG expert appraisal the future bills for the reform broadcasting and transform the state company ORG into an independent public service corporation ; ... ”

On DATE ORG adopted a recommendation , No . CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) on “ The functioning of the democratic institutions in GPE ” , containing inter alia the following request :

“ CARDINAL . The ORG also asks ORG to step up co - operation with the GPE authorities concerning :

i. NORP speedy expert appraisal of coming bills to reform broadcasting and transform ORG into an independent public service corporation ; ... ”

Following correspondence between the NORP authorities and the Secretary General of ORG , an expert , PERSON , Head of ORG at NORP Television , carried out a written analysis of the ORG 's draft law on public service broadcasting in GPE . In his first report , of DATE , ( ATCM ( DATE ) CARDINAL ) , PERSON commented , inter alia :

“ [ The ORG 's draft ] ... provides for many forms of direct political interference into [ the broadcasting organisation 's ] activities :

• Obligation in Article PERSON ) and Article CARDINAL ) to disseminate ' communications ORG public , reçues des autorités publiques ' and to provide air time , on request , to public authorities and organs of public administration , for the transmission of such announcements , without any limits concerning the content , nature and reasons for their transmission .

• Appointment of members of ORG directly by ORG , the President and government - Art . CARDINAL ) .

• Possibility of their dismissal at any time by the body which appointed them , in case of ' a violation of ORG , i.e. practically under any pretext – Art . CARDINAL(CARDINAL ) .

• The requirement that the rules of procedure of ORG must be approved by ORG . CARDINAL ) .

• Appointment of Director General directly by ORG , which can also dismiss him / her on a motion from ORG . CARDINAL .

• The right of a special parliamentary committee to demand written explanation of any action by the public broadcaster which in the ORG 's opinion violates the law , and then to require , together with ORG , that such violations be redressed .

These proposed provisions can hardly be accepted as being in line with Recommendation No . R ( CARDINAL)CARDINAL of ORG on the Guarantee of ORG or with LAW . The provision of LAW that freedom of speech should be exercised ' without interference by a public authority ' refers in particular to interferences imposed by the ORG or a public authority or official . Moreover , ORG has recognised that in certain circumstances the LAW may impose a positive obligation on a state to prevent , regulate or limit interferences by a private person or body with freedom of expression . Genuine , effective exercise of the freedom of expression and information does not depend merely on the ORG 's duty not to interfere , but may also require positive measures to help to stimulate or to protect and defend the freedom of expression . It is expected that the member states of ORG are under the obligation to take the necessary measures to protect and to promote the freedom of expression exercised by mass media and journalists . The provisions listed above can not be reconciled with these obligations , because they concentrate on creating positive reasons for political authorities to intervene into the operation of the public service broadcaster in ways which create a real possibility of limiting its freedom ” .

Mr PERSON 's second analysis , dated DATE ( ATCM ( DATE ) CARDINAL ) , was concerned primarily with the proposals for the composition of ORG 's governing body , the “ ORG ” . He referred to the guideline set out in the Appendix to ORG R ( CARDINAL ) CARDINAL ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) , that the rules governing the status and membership of supervisory bodies of public service broadcasting organisations should be drafted so as to avoid placing the bodies at risk of political or other interference and observed that there were CARDINAL possible models for the composition and manner of appointment of members of bodies like ORG :

“ • Under the first , identified institutions and groups in the civil society are authorized to delegate a representative of their own choice to ORG , for a fixed period ( e.g. DATE ) . Examples of such institutions and groups are churches , universities , theatres , authors , journalists , musicians , farmers , women , young people , sports federations , environmentalists , employers , trade unions , etc .

• Under the second , a fixed number of members ( e.g. DATE twelve ) is appointed by ORG or by several public institutions ( e.g. CARDINAL by ORG , CARDINAL by the government , CARDINAL by the President ) . Since the members of ORG are to represent the interests of the civil society , great pains must be taken to ensure that they do not in reality represent the political views and interests of those who appointed them ...

In the socio - political conditions of a country in transition , the second model contains a potential contradiction : can individuals appointed by ORG , or by ORG , the government and the President , really represent civil society , or the interests of society in general ? In conditions of extreme politicisation of public life , can political appointees really be relied upon NOT to represent the political views and interests of those who appointed them ?

Because the risk that they will do precisely that is very high , preference should , we believe , be given to the first model .

Of course , despite all the legal precautions , no - one can control who individual members of the ORG will want to listen to and whose views they will want to follow . For this reason , it is important that the composition of the ORG be as pluralistic as possible , so that potential influences which the ORG members may be under will be as diversified as possible . ... ”

On DATE , with a view to transforming ORG into a public service broadcasting organisation , ORG adopted PERSON No . CARDINAL-XV ORG on ORG . The PERSON , which did not take into account ORG expert 's recommendations ( see paragraphs CARDINAL - CARDINAL above ) , provided as follows :

The national public audiovisual institution – the ' ORG Company - is hereby created . It shall be an institution with legal personality and with functional autonomy and editorial independence which shall ensure the right to the freedom to impart truthful and objective information throughout the territory of GPE ...

( CARDINAL ) ORG must ensure a large diversity of broadcasts covering the interests of different social , national , religious and political categories .

( CARDINAL ) The Company must ensure respect for the principle of objectivity and impartiality within its news and documentary broadcasts .

( CARDINAL ) ORG is an autonomous body which shall be responsible for ensuring observance of the right of the people and of society to receive truthful , complete and objective information . It shall be charged with monitoring the ORG 's observance of law and of its statute .

( CARDINAL ) The Observers ' Council shall be composed of CARDINAL members who are well - known persons from the cultural , scientific , educational , media and other spheres . Their term of office shall be DATE and they shall be appointed by :

( a ) Parliament – CARDINAL members ( CARDINAL from the opposition ) ... ;

( b ) The President of GPE – CARDINAL members ;

( c ) The Government – CARDINAL members ;

( d ) The High Council of the Judiciary – CARDINAL member ;

( e ) NORP The creative staff of the Company – CARDINAL member ;

( f ) NORP The national minorities ' organisations CARDINAL members ;

( g ) The Confederation of the Trade Unions of GPE – CARDINAL member ;

( h ) The Confederation of the Free Trade Unions ' ORG ' – one member ;

( i ) The Creative Unions ( ORG , ORG , ORG , ORG , ORG ) – CARDINAL member ;

( j ) The media organisations ( ORG , ORG , ORG , ORG , ORG , the GPE - media ORG ) – CARDINAL member ;

( k ) The Association of Veterans – CARDINAL member .

The ORG shall :

Appoint the President of the Company , the Vice - President , ORG and ORG Director of Radio ;

Confirm the composition of ORG ;

Supervising the Company 's activity

( CARDINAL ) Supervision of the ORG 's activity shall be exercised by ORG .

( CARDINAL ) If ORG is not discharging its supervisory functions properly , ORG may , by way of ORG , demand from any organ of the ORG written information about the actions or omissions which in ORG 's view breach the present law . ORG shall be composed of representatives of all the parliamentary factions , which shall be represented proportionally to the representation of their parties in ORG .

( CARDINAL ) ORG , together with ORG , may order the Company to take adequate measures to eliminate the breaches of law found .

( CARDINAL ) ORG shall have the right to challenge in the courts , in accordance with the legislation in force , the legality of the orders received ...

( CARDINAL ) Any measure taken under the present Article shall not infringe the ORG 's freedom of information and the right to freedom of expression . ”

On DATE ORG adopted a Reply to ORG Recommendation CARDINAL ( see paragraph CARDINAL above ) in which it stated , inter alia , that the status of ORG remained a subject of concern . Although PERSON No . CARDINAL-XV represented progress , it provided for many forms of direct political interference with ORG 's activities , as PERSON ORG had pointed out in his analysis . ORG stressed that the provisions were not in line with the standards of ORG and risked being in contradiction with LAW .

On DATE ORG adopted a further resolution on the functioning of democratic institutions in GPE , no . CARDINAL ( DATE ) , in which it invited the GPE authorities to “ revise , during DATE , the law on the national public broadcasting company GPE , by genuinely involving civil society , associations representing the media and the political opposition in discussion , and by taking on board the recommendations made by ORG experts . In particular , it requested that “ revision of the provisions on the composition , appointment and powers of the observers ' council be the subject of the widest possible consultation ... ”

DATE . The Government subsequently decided that Law No . CARDINAL-XV had not been sufficient to complete the transformation of ORG and an amending bill was drafted , which , in addition to a number of minor amendments , contained a proposal to liquidate the existing FAC and establish a new organisation under the same name .

Mr PERSON published an analysis of the draft amending law on DATE ( ATCM(CARDINAL)CARDINAL ) in which he made the following observations :

“ ... The law now in force contains only basic provisions concerning the status of the company as a public service broadcaster and describing its institutional arrangements . Therefore , it was clear that it would have to be amended and extended to create a full and appropriate legal framework for public service broadcasting in GPE - in line with Resolution No . CARDINAL ' ORG adopted by the CARDINALth European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy ( Prague , DATE ) ; Recommendation No . R(CARDINAL)CARDINAL of ORG , and Recommendation Rec(CARDINAL)CARDINAL of ORG .

The question , therefore , arises as to whether this proposed amendment meets that goal .

CONCLUSION

Apart from the proposal to liquidate the existing FAC and to establish a new organisation under the same name in its place , the amendments concern relatively minor matters . ...

Accordingly , these amendments can not be seen as completing the effort fully to regulate GPE , safeguard its proper operation , independence , autonomy and financing , and create legal certainty for the company . They change little of real substance in the way FAC operates as a public service broadcaster . ...

Under the amendments , the plan is to ( i ) liquidate ORG Teleradio - Moldova ; ( ii ) to dismiss its entire personnel ; and ( iii ) to deprive it of all the assets ( which assets would then be transferred to the new ORG Teleradio - Moldova is to be the subject of a separate government decision and there is no deadline by which this decision is to be taken ) . It is not clear whether this means that GPE should suspend its operations and stop broadcasting in the interim period or not . This is certainly suggested by the provision that its entire staff is to be dismissed , but perhaps there is a plan to continue broadcasting nonetheless .

The execution of this plan would be very disruptive for ORG and its audiences . At the same time , it is not clear what substantive purpose this would serve . As we will argue below , there is nothing in the draft amendments which makes this indispensable from a legal point of view . Moreover , it appears that the liquidation will not be complete , since there is no provision for the appointment of a new ORG , nor of a new President . If the governing bodies of the organisation remain , there is no real liquidation , only mass dismissal of the staff under the guise of liquidation . ... ”

The amending law was nonetheless adopted by ORG on CARDINAL DATE . ORG was registered with ORG as a Public Company on DATE and started to broadcast under its new statute on DATE .

On DATE ORG adopted LAW ( DATE ) on the functioning of the democratic institutions in GPE , in which it made the following observations , among others :

“ CARDINAL . ... However , genuine involvement of civil society requires a pluralist and dynamic media sector , particularly with regard to television . The conditions must also be created for a genuinely independent and professional public broadcasting service .

The ORG further urges the GPE authorities , with regard to the protection of human rights , to ...

CARDINAL.CARDINAL.CARDINAL . revise legislation regarding public service broadcasting ( both national and local ) and the Audio - visual sector in general ;

CARDINAL.CARDINAL.CARDINAL . NORP pursue the transformation of GPE into a genuine public service broadcaster , as defined in FAC DATE ( DATE ) on public service broadcasting ; ... ”

In DATE the Special Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in GPE made the following report on the media in GPE :

“ The Constitution of the Republic of Moldova guarantees freedom of expression and freedom of the press . Yet the situation in the media in GPE is CARDINAL of the fields of major concern for a number of embassies in GPE as well as NGOs . During DATE pressure of the authorities over the independent mass media means increased , in parallel with support of state publications .

The situation in the electronic media is very important having in mind that in rural areas , where CARDINAL of the population of GPE lives , access to information is very limited . Newsstands are practically non - existent , and written press gets there with delays up to DATE . The radio is the main source of information .

The opposition is not adequately represented on the air . Dismissals of journalists are becoming more frequent .

• One of the spectacular examples of censorship in ORG was the banning of the transmission of the popular live talk - show Buna Seara CARDINAL DATE to which the leaders of parliamentary factions ORG , ORG and PERSON , SRSG and ORG of ORG had been invited . TIME the beginning of the program SRSG was officially informed by ORG Chairman PERSON that it was not going on air because the majority leader had decided not to attend .

• There is a common agreement between the political forces that the TV channel GPE CARDINAL has to transmit TIME of the meetings of the Permanent round table without editing . This obligation was not honoured during the DATE meeting of the table and the explanation was that the appearance in TIME DATE is enough for DATE . The report that went on the news DATE delicately avoided most statements containing criticism towards the authorities .

• ' The Hour of the Opposition ' itself , which looks like monologue of the opposition , does not seem to be contributing much to the dialogue with the majority . What we need is real debate . ... ”

The Organization for Security and Co - operation in LOC ( OSCE ) 's Representative on Freedom of the ORG made his second visit to GPE from DATE , at the invitation of the Government . The purpose of the trip was to assess the current state of media freedom in the country and to provide the authorities with recommendations . The Representative met with government officials , parliamentarians , journalists , and representatives of non - governmental organisations . On DATE he published his “ Observations and recommendations ” , which stated inter alia :

“ Positive developments – pluralism ...

There are a number of estimable developments in the situation of the NORP media .

Overall , media pluralism is highly developed in GPE , both in terms of quantity of media outlets and of different views that are represented ( albeit diversity on both counts is more present in the print press than in the broadcast media ) . Politicians of all ranks are regularly criticised in the media ; independent TV and radio stations are very outspoken in their comments on the authorities . There is also an open debate regarding the development of the media itself ; this debate was described by the Foreign Minister as ' transparent . ' ...

GPE was also CARDINAL of the first countries in the region to transform its state broadcaster into a public service one .

Nevertheless , most interlocutors agreed that there were several outstanding media problems that needed to be dealt with in the foreseeable future . Some of the shortcomings , as parliamentarian opposition leader PERSON put it ' were the result of a growing democracy . ' In his view the LOC needed to get more involved in media matters . The Foreign Minister also stated that ' GPE has some shortcomings in the media field , but these are not intentional . Other NORP states also have shortcomings . We do not want to take a wrong way and that is why we are grateful for any recommendations coming from the LOC , and other international organisations . '

The purpose of this report is to offer such recommendations based on observations made during the visit .

ORG

There can be no true pluralism when there are no competing domestic nationwide channels . In this situation , a transparent tender is needed for another nationwide frequency .

Currently , there are CARDINAL nation - wide broadcasters in GPE , and CARDINAL of them – the public company ORG ( TRM ) DATE is a NORP channel in terms of content . The other CARDINAL channels re - broadcast programming from neighbouring countries : GPE and GPE .

It seems to be clear that a fourth nationwide frequency exists ; however the issuing of this frequency was stopped by the licensing authority in DATE . The tender for the third nationwide channel – the CARDINAL re - broadcasting a NORP network – was announced on DATE ; however , a tender for the fourth has not been re - announced . For additional information on problems of transparency in licensing , see the chapter on ORG .

The Situation around TRM

Too much Government , too few other voices

ORG , although legally transformed from state broadcaster into an autonomous public service institution , in reality continues to tilt towards the Government . Most of the political programming is reported to be news on and by the ruling party . In this situation , when ORG is the only domestic nationwide broadcaster , balanced coverage of political events is even more important . TRM still has to live up to its commitments as a public service broadcaster .

No content monitoring is conducted by ORG itself despite the fact that it is prescribed by LAW on ORG GPE . The explanation given by ORG management was a lack of resources to produce the needed tapes . But in fact it was ORG ( ORG ) which at least should have tried to enforce such monitoring . The ORG , explaining their lack of concern for monitoring , said that in the initial period when ORG has only started its public way of functioning , it would have been misleading to produce any monitoring .

As a result , only the NGO community did such monitoring . Their findings were heavily disputed by the ORG management , the ORG , and ruling party officials . It is true that the NGO monitoring was done on a quantitative basis . The ' stopwatch ' method is unquestionably crude , and can not reveal the nuances of programming . Still , this method is good enough , and the results were overwhelming enough to show that the news coverage at ORG since the transformation was disproportionately about the Government and by the Government .

ORG

Both ORG management and ORG that represents journalists who were not hired as part of the transformation process from state to public broadcaster should agree on a compromise through negotiations .

The OSCE Representative and his staff had several meetings with ORG management and with representatives of former ORG journalists who were not re - hired after ORG was officially transformed from a state to a public broadcaster . PERSON Ivanko observed the work of ORG of GPE that was established to deal with this labour dispute .

Background

In DATE strikes and protests against alleged censorship at TRM supported by CARDINAL ORG employees started a debate in GPE on the need to transform FAC into a public broadcaster . The required legal framework was established under ORG guidance .

The PERSON on ORG Teleradio GPE was adopted by parliament on DATE . The PERSON was revised on DATE after it was criticised by ORG . On DATE the law was changed again ; this time with the aim of liquidating the previous state broadcaster . This meant that the newly established public company would not be under any obligation to hire all of the staff from the state broadcaster . According to several sources , there was fear among ORG staff that the selection process would make redundant those employees who had been most active during the DATE protests and who had campaigned for the transformation of TRM into an independent public broadcaster .

A selection commission formed by CARDINAL members proposed by ORG , CARDINAL members proposed by ORG and CARDINAL member elected by the staff of ORG was established on DATE . The commission selected new staff by DATE .

CARDINAL persons were offered contracts , CARDINAL signed them . CARDINAL positions are still vacant . The selection commission therefore has not concluded its work . CARDINAL staff members have been laid off .

After the selection results for the news departments had been announced on DATE , discontent among ORG employees about the way the process was conducted turned into public protests . On DATE a group of ORG employees founded ORG and occupied the room in which the selection commission held its meetings . In response , ORG management suspended the contracts of CARDINAL employees and on DATE the police removed the protestors from the building .

These demonstrations , at CARDINAL point involved CARDINAL of people , started in protest against the results of the selection process . The main demand was therefore to rerun the process . This demand was later modified to ' returning to the situation before the selection procedure started . ' The modified demand could be theoretically satisfied without a re - run by offering contracts to all the CARDINAL laid off staff .

All interlocutors agreed that the situation around ORG was the most pressing media issue in the country . All seemed to agree that the only way to proceed was through a negotiating process . As Foreign Minister PERSON put it : ' We want the transformation of TRM to be done in a democratic way . ' Nevertheless , several questions should be raised .

The whole selection process seems to be marred by lack of understanding of the demands of such a process . Although it is clear that some of the staff would probably have to be made redundant , the selection criteria were not clearly defined , and the selection itself was not transparent . Charges of political bias can not be refuted given the lack of transparency in the selection process .

The attitude of the ORG management , at least initially , was not constructive and led to massive protests and to a stalemate that is still not resolved .

On the other hand , ORG , formed originally to defend the rights of the laid off staff , started adding political demands to their original labour ones .

In this situation , the OSCE Representative , together with the Head of the OSCE Mission in GPE and the Special representative of the Secretary General of ORG suggested to the above - mentioned ORG that a new selection commission should be created according to the following formula :

- CARDINAL members of the selection commission to be appointed by the administration of GPE ;

- CARDINAL members of the commission to be appointed by ORG ;

- CARDINAL members of the commission to be appointed by consensus by ORG . Alternatively , CARDINAL of these CARDINAL members could be a foreign expert , seconded by the LOC or ORG .

At time of writing , this issue is still pending . ORG at FAC held CARDINAL meetings in DATE . On both sessions the commission discussed the joint proposal on a new selection commission , put forward on DATE by ORG , ORG . The Commission failed to come to a decision concerning this joint proposal . Referring to a lack of progress in the work of the Commission and having accused ORG management of ' simulating a dialogue ' the representatives of the protesting journalists withdrew from ORG on DATE .

ORG [ referred to elsewhere in this judgment as ' ORG ' : see paragraph CARDINAL above ]

The current ORG ( ORG ) , although in theory its majority is formed by civil society , does not represent the whole spectrum of views prevalent in society , and in fact allows for political CARDINAL - sidedness . The current law should be changed to allow for a different composition of the ORG .

Several opposition parliamentarians , journalists and NGOs complained about the current set - up of the ORG which includes CARDINAL representatives from ORG ( CARDINAL from the opposition ) , CARDINAL from Government , CARDINAL appointed by the President , and CARDINAL from different organisations . However , the President , the ORG and ORG are controlled by CARDINAL party , and so are the majority of civil organisations represented on the board .

The leader of the ORG faction PERSON acknowledged that not all civil society was represented on the board , but only ' the main civic organisations ' which leaves open the question of who and , more importantly , how defines an organisation as being ' main . ' In the highly politicised climate in GPE a highly politicised ORG is seen as undermining the credibility of the public broadcaster . CARDINAL of the proposals coming from opposition leader Braghis would provide for a CARDINAL member ORG , CARDINAL people from the ruling party , CARDINAL from the opposition , and the board working strictly on a consensus basis .

Although this idea may sound appealing it might also lead to a stalemate where the board would not be able to agree on anything leaving ORG management without any supervisory control .

The PERSON and ORG should be encouraged to come up with a proposal on the structure of the ORG that would have the approval of all political sides in GPE . Several proposals , especially the one prepared by ORG ( PERSON ) , should be carefully analysed .

The Audio - visual Co - ordination ORG

Tenders for frequency allocations are offered at very short notice , and do not provide enough time for potential applicants to prepare all the necessary documents . The composition of the ORG does not guarantee its objectivity . Also , there is a lack of transparency in the decision - making process regarding the allocation of frequencies .

Complaints about political bias in frequency allocation could not be substantiated . But when looking into these complaints , the Representative established that the process allows for subjectivity when evaluating and voting on tenders for frequency allocation .

Broadcasting licenses are allocated by the ORG . In a system that can only be described as ' CARDINAL - headed ' , the actual frequencies to be used by the licensee are provided to the ORG by ORG . As CARDINAL senior official said : ' We do not know when these frequencies become available . '

The ORG , which consists of CARDINAL people , is appointed respectively by the Government , the President , and the ORG . In a situation like DATE 's , when the majority in all the executive and legislative branches are controlled by CARDINAL party , this system leads to total political control of the ORG . Several interlocutors complained that they did not have any trust in the ORG 's objectivity when issuing licenses for channels .

It should also be noted that the tender for the very important fourth nationwide channel was not re - issued after DATE when there was absolutely no movement on this matter . On the other hand , the tender for the third nationwide network , the license of which was running out , had been issued on DATE notice , and was only announced in CARDINAL newspapers in a small print advertisement .

To ensure the independence of the ORG , the election procedure should not be politically oriented , and should focus on employing as members of the ORG individuals who are reputable experts in the broadcasting field .

The method of frequency allocation has to be changed . CARDINAL agency should be in charge of both establishing and allocating the frequencies . This would correct the current ' CARDINAL - headed ' system when the ORG is at the mercy of the Ministry , not knowing when ( and why ) a frequency might be offered for tender . ...

Recommendations

· There can be no true pluralism when there are no competing domestic nation - wide channels . In this situation , a transparent tender is needed for another nation - wide frequency .

· PERSON , although legally has been transformed from state broadcaster into an autonomous public service institution , in reality continues to tilt towards the Government . Most of the political programming is reported to be news on and by the ruling party . In this situation , when ORG is the only domestic nationwide broadcaster , balanced coverage of political events is even more important . TRM still has to live up to its commitments as a public service broadcaster .

· Both ORG management and ORG that represents journalists who were not hired as part of the transformation process from state to public broadcaster should agree on a compromise through negotiations .

· A new ORG selection commission should be created .

· The current ORG ( ORG ) , although in theory its majority is formed by civil society , does not represent the whole spectrum of views prevalent in society , and in fact allows for political CARDINAL - sidedness . The current law should be changed to allow for a different composition of the ORG .

· Tenders for frequency allocations are offered at very short notice , and do not provide enough time for potential applicants to prepare all the necessary documents . The composition of the ORG does not guarantee its objectivity . Also , there is a lack of transparency in the decision process regarding the allocation of frequencies . ... ”

At around the same time the OSCE and ORG jointly published the following “ Benchmarks for the Operation of Public Broadcasters in GPE ” :

“ CARDINAL . Public Television and Radio should

• give a complete , accurate , impartial , balanced and objective overview over political , economic , social and cultural developments in GPE ;

• provide a comprehensive picture over the real situation in the country ;

• encourage viewers to form their own individual opinion in a free manner ;

• reflect cultural and regional diversity ;

• respect gender equity ;

• serve all groups of society , including those neglected by commercial broadcasters , such as ethnic minorities and others ;

• respect the dignity of the human being and promote the values commonly shared by ORG and the LOC , especially with respect to democracy , pluralism , tolerance and respect for human rights and freedoms .

Factual programs shall be impartial , this means they shall be fair , accurate and shall maintain a proper respect for truth . A program may choose to explore any subject at any point on the spectrum of debate , as long as there are good editorial reasons for doing so . It may choose to test or report CARDINAL side of a particular argument . However , it must do so with fairness and integrity . It should ensure that opposing views are not misrepresented .

News reports have to be rigorously sourced and verified . Information should be broadcast as a fact only if it is verified by CARDINAL independent sources . Acceptable exceptions to the double - source requirement are fact directly confirmed by a reporter of the public broadcaster or significant news drawn from official announcements of a nation or an organization . When a secondary source offers exclusive significant news which can not be verified by using a second source , the information should be attributed to the originating agency by name .

News should be presented with due accuracy and impartiality . Reporting should be dispassionate , wide - ranging and well - informed . It should present a comprehensive description of events , reporting an issue in a reliable and unbiased way . The main differing views should be given due weight in the period of which the controversy is active .

NORP In case a number of programs are clearly interlinked and form de facto a series on reports of related issues , impartiality can be achieved over the entire series . Editorial programs , for example , should give over one month approximate equal time to representatives of the government and the parliamentary majority on the one hand and the opposition on the other hand on related issues . In case a number of programs are broadcast under the same title , but deal with separate issues , impartiality has to be reached within every individual program .

Due impartiality is of special importance in major matters of controversy . It should be especially insured that a full range of significant views and perspectives are heard during the period in which the controversy is active .

NORP The public broadcaster should provide live coverage of all or parts of parliamentary debates in which issues of extraordinary importance are discussed . Coverage of debates in parliament has to be balanced . Therefore live coverage of such debates should not be interrupted before or during the intervention of opposition speakers and should not be ended before the leading opposition speakers have replied to the speeches of government officials or representatives of the majority faction .

News should include regular reports on debates in parliament . Reports on parliamentary debates should give equal air time to the arguments of the government and the majority faction on the one hand and the opposition on the other hand .

Reports on activities of the president and the government should include or should be followed by statements and comments by representatives of the opposition and representatives of institutions or organizations directly affected by these activities .

Whenever a program voices strong criticism or charges directed against an individual or an organization , with iniquity or incompetence or when charges or accusations made by third persons are reported in the program , those criticized should be given a fair opportunity to respond . As a rule , the response or balancing information should be included in the first use of a news item or feature containing the material . If the response or balancing information can not be obtained by program deadline , or the subject of the charge declines to comment , that will be made clear in the public broadcaster 's account and the response or balancing information will be broadcast as soon as it is available . In particular , when a government official or member of the parliamentary majority directly criticizes an individual or an organization , the reaction of the individual or organization criticized should be included in the report or should follow immediately . The time provided for reply should as a rule equal the time of the critic .

NORP In case the President , the Speaker of ORG or the Prime Minister give an interview longer than TIME or a speech on public TV or Radio the leaders of the opposition parliamentary factions should be given within TIME the possibility to comment on the remarks made on public TV or radio respectively .

Representatives of non - governmental organizations should be given access to public TV and Radio to voice their opinion on developments or government actions connected to their field of activity .

Live talk shows on political , social , economic and cultural issues should form a regular part of the programs of public TV and Radio . Invited participants should always reflect a balanced selection of representatives from government , parliament , political parties , civil society , business community , churches or international organizations , depending on the nature of the topic . The refusal of an organization or an individual to take part in a program should not be allowed to act as a veto . The reasons for the absence of an organization or an individual should be explained and as far as possible a fair representation of the views of the missing contributor based on what is already known should be provided .

During election campaigns the public media should provide adequate opportunity , on an equitable and non - discriminatory basis , for election contestants to inform the public about their candidacies and political programs . It should provide active media coverage of the preparation and conduct of the elections and should provide voters with unbiased information and education .

Serious factual error should be admitted , clearly , frankly and without delay .

Facts should not only be got right , but also language should be fair . Exaggerations should be avoided and language should not be used inadvertently so as to suggest value judgments , commitment or lack of objectivity .

The use of unattributed pejorative terms or labels to describe persons or organizations should be avoided at all times . Only when the individuals and groups use those labels to describe themselves or their activities an exception might be made .

Commentary should always respect the truth and should never be used to give the audience a dishonest impression of events .

NORP In news and other factual programs events should neither be fabricated , distorted or dramatized .

Surreptitious recording should only be used as an investigative tool to explore matters which raise issues of serious anti - social or criminal behavior where there is reasonable prior evidence of such a behavior . No ' fishing expeditions ' should be undertaken . Surreptitious recording might be done also for purely entertainment purposes , but in this case the material shall be used only when the consent of the individual recorded has been obtained afterwards . As a method of social research surreptitious recording might be used only if there is no other method that could reasonably capture the behavior under scrutiny and only if the identities of the individual concerned are disguised by voice - over or blurring . Material obtained by other sources should be used only if consistent with the guidelines mentioned above .

When portraying social groups , stereotypes should be avoided . Where prejudice and disadvantage exists they have to be reported and reflected , but nothing should be done to perpetuate them . Non - sexist language shall be used whenever possible .

The state audiovisual archives should be regarded as repositories of the nation 's audiovisual heritage to be used by public service broadcasters for the general benefit .

The government and public bodies should never abuse their custody over public finances to try to influence the content of broadcasts ; the placement of public advertising should be based on market considerations .

Editorial independence should be guaranteed . Neither political nor commercial considerations should unduly influence the content of a broadcast program . On the editorial independence , a common code of conduct should be reached between the staff and the board of directors on basic journalistic principles . This common code of conduct shall at least contain the following principles :

• standing up for human rights ;

• standing up for the fundamental democratic rights , the parliamentary system

and international understanding , as laid down in LAW ;

• fighting any nationalist or racial discrimination .

The selection of staff for the public broadcaster should be based on a transparent , non - discriminatory process without regard to gender , age or ethnic or social origin . The selection should based on the merit principle , which entails the employment of the most qualified person for any given job and which provides for non - selected applicants the right to appeal against this decision and to ask for a review against the specifications for the position . ”

On DATE ORG published a “ NORP Neighbourhood Policy Country Report ” on GPE ( ORG ( DATE ) CARDINAL ) , which made a number of findings regarding , inter alia , democracy and human rights in the country . The report noted the concern of OSCE observers monitoring the DATE local elections “ about the clear bias in favour of the incumbent authorities on ORG ” . The report continued :

“ GPE has an active and independent media . However , recent legislation and drafts ( the DATE amendments to LAW and a recent draft law on the restructuring of the public broadcaster ) have raised concern notably on the independence of journalists . In DATE , the ORG and ORG jointly issued a recommendation on how the public broadcaster should be structured .

A number of recent developments have underlined these concerns : ... problems with registration for CARDINAL local radios , a statement by the chairman of ORG about the reported imposition by ORG of the programme ' the hour of the government ' and his subsequent dismissal , and high fines imposed on local newspapers and opposition leaders for slander . These developments have been highlighted as issues of concern by ORG and PERSON ... ”

DATE . ORG ( ORG ) is a non - governmental organization based in GPE with a mission to support professional journalism in GPE and to contribute to the consolidation of an independent and impartial press . It was established in DATE as an ORG and became independent in DATE . It is funded by , inter alia , ORG .

The ORG monitored ORG programming DATE and DATE . According to its monitoring report for DATE , no representative from ORG , which was at the time one of the CARDINAL parliamentary opposition parties , appeared on ORG television programmes with a political subject during DATE and another parliamentary opposition party , “ GPE Democrată ” , appeared only once for TIME . In contrast , the ruling ORG appeared CARDINAL times for a total duration of TIME . Similar patterns were reported in DATE , DATE and DATE . In its report published in DATE , the ORG found that , on television , the Government and their representatives were mentioned on average CARDINAL times a day while the opposition was referred to on average twice a day . On ORG 's radio programmes , the Government was mentioned on average CARDINAL times a day and the opposition CARDINAL times DATE .

In a report entitled “ State to Public : ORG in GPE , GPE and GPE ? ” ( DATE ) , LAW , an international non - governmental organisation based in GPE which works on issues connected with freedom of expression , found as follows ( footnotes omitted ) :

“ CARDINAL . Overview

GPE was the first country of the ORG to embark on a process towards the establishment of ORG [ public service broadcasting ] . It is also currently the only one of the CARDINAL countries to have transformed its ORG broadcasting company , ORG ( TRM ) , into a ORG [ public service broadcasting organisation ] . Yet while ORG exists in theory , in practice the new broadcasting company remains only nominally independent from government control , and output continues to be heavily biased in favour of the existing regime . Overall , it fails to provide viewers and listeners with accurate and objective information and a plurality of views and opinions . The consolidation of a genuine ORG structure will depend on the ability and will of the authorities to fully implement the newly - adopted provisions , as well as on the success of civil society 's campaigning efforts .

In DATE , ORG adopted the Law on Amending and Supplementing Law No.CARDINAL-XV on ORG TeleRadio - Moldova ( LAW ) , which modified a previous law passed in DATE ( ORG ) following recommendations from ORG . A later controversial amendment to the PERSON , adopted in DATE , provided for the liquidation of ORG , enabling its reincarnation as ORG , as well as the replacement of its entire staff ( LAW ) .

For a prolonged period of time it remained unclear how the re - staffing would be carried out , and generally journalists and human rights organisations were not provided with essential information as to the mechanisms that would be employed to implement these measures . In addition , the initial debates which led to the adoption of LAW in its first reading were held in an atmosphere of virtual secrecy . At this stage the company 's staff was utterly unaware of the fact that a law on ORG was being debated in ORG .

Similarly , the process by which LAW was adopted did not provide for sufficient opportunity for public consultation , despite the significant public importance of a law of this nature . The draft was submitted to ORG by CARDINAL MPs on DATE , and adopted in its first reading almost immediately ; it then passed its second reading DATE . Some local NGOs and international organisations , such as ORG , acted very rapidly in providing recommendations on the draft . Other groups simply did not have the time to participate in this process .

Despite the changes , ORG is still under the influence of the authorities . In addition , the quality of programmes has been quite low since the transformation . There is a need for additional funding , to train the employees and raise the standards of professional journalism .

Another worrying fact is that there has been a progressive decrease in the diversity of media outlets . ' ORG , the media organisation that founded ORG , which until recently re - broadcast ORG - as well as having some programmes of its own , including NORP news - , was deprived of its licence in DATE . The licence was , instead , given to a newly - established , unknown television station , which allegedly has close links to President PERSON . The decision to deprive ORG of its licence was reached very speedily ; there was even a special edition of ORG announcing it , to avoid a wait of DATE for the decision to come into effect . This development is even more worrying as the old GPE ORT displayed virtually no criticism of the authorities , and frequently its portrayal of the authorities was positive . GPE ORG was one of the main television channels in GPE , together with ORG and private ORG . With ORG and ORG heavily pro - governmental , the new development is likely to dramatically reduce the ( already limited ) diversity of the NORP broadcast scene .

The breakaway region of GPE in eastern GPE still does not have ORG and its ORG television is under the authorities ' control .

The Legislation

According to LAW , ORG is ' functionally autonomous and editorially independent ' and ensures ' in the spirit of plurality of opinions , the exercise of the right to timely , truthful and full communication of information ' . LAW lists the organisation 's objective , which includes : ensuring the free access of society to information ; reflecting objectively and fully all aspects of the social - political , economic and cultural life of the country ; and realising the right of the individual to free expression .

The ORG also provides for the establishment of an ORG ( the ORG ) to monitor the implementation of the provisions of the law and its by - laws . According to the law , the ORG is composed of CARDINAL members chosen from “ known personalities in the areas of culture , science , education , mass media and from other representatives of civil society , appointed for a term of DATE ; CARDINAL ORG members are appointed by the President , CARDINAL by the government and CARDINAL by the ORG , with the rest appointed by ORG , the staff of ORG , trade unions , media development organisations and representatives of cultural and minority groups ( LAW ) .

The ORG , through a special parliamentary commission ( constituted on the basis of proportional representation of the political parties ) has the right to investigate the company 's activities when the ORG fails to exercise in an appropriate manner its supervisory function .

While de jure the ORG is independent of government control , concerns remains as to how independent it is in practice , given that a proportion of its members are chosen directly by the President and the authorities . Dependency certainly appeared to be the case when PERSON , a young businessman with little media experience but close to the ruling ORG , was appointed as Chairman of ORG by ORG in DATE .

There has also been criticism that despite the nominal inclusion of ' representatives of civil society ' in the makeup of the ORG , civil society groups are not adequately involved in supervising the activities of ORG . The members representing trade unions and army veterans reportedly follow the governmental line , whilst those who are independent and wish to serve the public are a minority within ORG .

Bias on TRM

As a ORG , ORG has an obligation to provide accurate and objective news and current affairs coverage , as well as a pluralistic range of voices and opinions . This is enshrined in LAW of LAW , which states that “ [ CARDINAL news programs ... shall have an impartial , independent and truthful character . Commentary shall be separated from news . ”

However , the monitoring of ORG 's output by various civil society organisations has revealed that , in practice , this is not the case . The gap between theory and practice appears to be due to interference of the State in the activities of ORG Government officials have reportedly been giving instructions over the telephone to ORG 's director . Allegedly the situation deteriorated in DATE , when ORG won a parliamentary majority . Journalists complained vociferously about the ORG 's lack of independence through mass demonstrations , involving QUANTITY , in DATE . In ORG others v. GPE , PERSON and other high - profile journalists submitted to ORG a case against GPE alleging violation of their right to free expression through cases of wide - spread censorship on the ORG broadcaster in DATE and DATE . Moreover , in DATE , a member of ORG stated that a great deal of pressure was regularly placed on the ORG 's members by the authorities .

News reporting remains inadequate and is overtly biased in favour of the ruling ORG . In addition , the President appears often in the news , more than the government . The opposition is very seldom portrayed , and often in a negative manner . There is very little time dedicated to social issues . The news is often superficial : while there are frequent discussions on GPE , there are is hardly any information on issues that may portray the government in a negative light . Civil society figures also have limited access to FAC and stories often lack multiple , diverse sources . In addition , life in GPE is reflected selectively through the viewpoint of those in power .

The situation worsens during elections campaigns . In the period leading up to local elections held on DATE , monitoring of television station ORG and ORG , which are both part of ORG , revealed that coverage was neither fair nor balanced : not only was coverage on GPE CARDINAL and ORG biased in favour of ORG , but it also attacked the non - NORP candidate standing for the post of mayor of GPE .

A similar pattern was observed during the campaign period for parliamentary elections held on DATE , and further local elections held in DATE . During this period , opposition parties such as ORG and the ORG ' ORG criticised news coverage on ORG for being overtly biased in favour of the ruling ORG , and media monitoring revealed that news coverage of events within GPE was overwhelmingly positive ; most reports relating to the campaign focused on the achievements of ruling party officials , and were positive or neutral , while reports relating to opposition parties were on the whole negative ; and opposition candidates received far less coverage than candidates of the ruling ORG . The time allocated for debates was insufficient . The questions by some of the moderators seemed to guide the discussions in a certain direction .

ORG ( APEL ) , in monitoring carried out DATE , noted that news reports were overwhelmingly ' rosy ' and non - conflictual , presenting a uniquely positive image of events within GPE , and with little coverage of more contentious social issues such as unemployment and poverty . Events in the capital GPE also received excessive coverage , while events in the rest of the country remained underreported .

PERSON stated that ' professional and moral ' standards within the organisation are routinely ignored , with journalists failing to verify information provided by government sources , limiting the role that ORG can play in contributing to informed debate and critical thought .

These findings were dismissed by PERSON , director of ORG , who accused their authors of incompetence , and suggested that they desired to profit from a negative portrayal of FAC . ORG also maintained that the limited coverage of opposition parties was due to the fact that they ' do not take part in any events , and they generally do nothing to be observed . '

The Transformation

Since its re - establishment as a ORG , ORG has been dealing with disputes between journalists and management , as a result of LAW DATE . Article CARDINAL of this law states that ' the government shall liquidate the ORG company ORG ' ( paragraph CARDINAL ) and that the ' employees of the ORG company ORG shall be discharged ' ( paragraph CARDINAL ) . Hence , the law aims at liquidating the ' old ' FAC and establishing a ' new ' institution , including through the replacement of staff .

At the time of its enactment , the law was criticised by the opposition ORG and ORG , as well as by civil society groups , who have accused the government of introducing the law in order to dismiss ' uncomfortable ' journalists and replace them with loyal ones . The amendments also gave rise to complaints from company employees , trade union committees and public organisations , which considered the action to liquidate the organisation unlawful .

Upon the announcement of the results of the re - staffing process , made on DATE , public protests were launched by ORG journalists . Violent clashes with the police occurred on CARDINAL separate occasions , on CARDINAL and DATE . ORG of ORG PACE ) linked the violence of police against protesters with the death of protester PERSON .

On DATE , CARDINAL employees were also prevented from entering the premises of ORG . The person responsible for TIME news was suspended . He later stated that there had been an order not to broadcast the DATE 's events by the chairman of ORG . A wildlife documentary featuring elephants was reportedly broadcast in lieu of DATE .

Journalists ' protests continued outside the ORG building and ORG from DATE through DATE . The protests were led by ORG ( ORG ) , an organisation set up to represent TRM journalists , and culminated with the submission of a case against GPE to ORG others v. GPE .

PERSON and other ORG journalists maintained the authorities prevented them from entering the FAC premises to preclude their exercise of their right to free expression .

The ORG employees requested an investigation of police violence towards the protesters in DATE by ORG , but were informed that the protests that started on DATE were contrary to national legislation and that the actions of the police were therefore legal . Instead , those who protested as of DATE in front of the ORG building were sued by the police for ' active participation in meetings organised without authorisation ' , under article CARDINAL(CARDINAL)(CARDINAL ) of LAW .

Minority programmes

LAW states that the objectives of ORG include ' to reflect the interests of all social strata and to propagate democratic values ' The law provides that a percentage of programmes should be in minority languages , although no further details on the languages in question are provided .

ORG broadcasts programmes in NORP , PERSON , NORP , GPE , NORP , LANGUAGE , LANGUAGE and PERSON language . The division of broadcasting by language is PERCENT LANGUAGE , PERCENT NORP and PERCENT other languages . Linguistic diversity does not appear to be an issue in GPE , given the influence of LANGUAGE language and culture , which means that GPE was never insular . Minority programmes are prepared by a special department , where a number of minority representatives are also employed . Many NORP - speakers , however , believe that they effectively experience discrimination , as the majority of programmes of the NORP broadcast media as a whole are in the ( non - official ) LANGUAGE language .

Funding

The public broadcaster is primarily financed through ORG funds , with some revenues from advertising , although ORG has less advertising than some private channels . In the process towards the adoption of LAW in DATE , the possibility of including provisions on fees was discussed . Such provisions were incorporated in the draft law compiled by civil society . However , the President criticised the NGOs ' draft exactly for its inclusion of fees , on the grounds that ORG could not afford to pay them . Many other politicians followed suit . In general , given GPE 's dire economic situation , there is little desire to pay ORG fees , and little understanding of the important role the introduction of fees would have in enhancing ORG 's independence .

Since the establishment of ORG , ORG has prepared CARDINAL DATE budgets , which were sent to ORG for approval . ORG does not have to provide details of their estimated expenditure for the upcoming year , but only the total . ”