Statement Regarding the New Legal Mechanism for Suspending Licenses of Audiovisual Media Service Providers

The undersigned non-governmental organizations express their concern regarding the lack of quality standards in the law allowing for the temporary or permanent suspension of licenses of audiovisual media service providers by the Council for Promoting National Important Investment Projects (CPNIIP). We emphasize that similar legal mechanisms, which involve the suspension of broadcasting permits of TV and radio stations without a court decision, have previously been declared unconstitutional. We reiterate disapproval regarding the lack of transparency in the process of drafting, voting on, and implementing the new legal mechanism, urging authorities to abandon such practices and revise relevant legal provisions to ensure their conformity with international standards.

On March 21, 2024, CPNIIP issued its second decision, temporarily suspending the validity of two additional broadcast licenses (Canal 5 and Maestro FM). This action was taken as a preventive measure, “following the identification of reasonable suspicions regarding the involvement of the ultimate beneficiaries of the company [the founding entity of the media service providers] in activities affecting the security of the state.”

We recall that the legal provisions establishing a new mechanism for suspending and withdrawing broadcast licenses of audiovisual media service providers, without a court decision and outside a state of emergency, gained legal force on December 23, 2023. These provisions were inserted into a bill aimed at ensuring “the integrity and functionality of the electricity market,” by amending the project on December 18, 2023, just four days before the final vote.

We reiterate that in the process of drafting, voting on, and implementing the new legal mechanism, authorities have defied transparency in the decision-making process, underestimating the importance of a detailed and nuanced review of the proposed legislation, based on the recommendations of stakeholders and experts in the relevant field.

The general public and civil society were first made aware with the new legal mechanisms on December 29, 2023, Friday evening, when the first decision of CPNIIP was published, suspending the broadcast licenses of previously targeted television stations under the provisions of the Commission for Emergency Situations (CES). According to the document, restrictions were imposed “for the period necessary for the provision of information and documents,” requested because the authority had found that the targeted media institutions had made “investments in areas of importance for the security of the state.”

Prior to the emergence of the new mechanism for suspending the permissive acts of audiovisual media service providers, the law allowed for the forced suspension of broadcast licenses only on the basis of a court decision, which represented an additional guarantee of the legality of the authorities’ decisions. According to the new legal mechanism for suspension and withdrawal of broadcast licenses, CPPIIN’s decisions become enforceable from the date of issuance. At the same time, suspension has been transformed from a punitive measure into a preventive one, applied for “the identification of reasonable suspicions.”

We inform the authorities that similar mechanisms have been previously declared unconstitutional (Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Moldova No. 17 of 06.12.2012 for the constitutional review of certain provisions of the Audiovisual Code of the Republic of Moldova No. 260-XVI of July 27, 2006).

Previously, the old Audiovisual Code (No. 260-XVI of July 27, 2006) provided for the possibility of suspending and withdrawing broadcast licenses by the Audiovisual Council (AC), then the Audiovisual Coordinating Council (ACC). Such a decision by the ACC, as with CPPIIN, became enforceable from the date of issuance, without a court decision. However, unlike the recently inserted mechanism, ACC was entitled to apply suspension as a punitive measure and not as a precautionary one, only after the gradual application of other types of sanctions (public warning; withdrawal of the right to broadcast advertisements for a certain period; fine) and only for violations of audiovisual media legislation.

Despite this significant difference, the Court declared unconstitutional the provisions regarding “the enforceability of the ACC decision on the application of sanctions to suspend the broadcast license for a certain period or to withdraw the broadcast license from the date of adoption.” The Constitutional Court considered that, in the specific circumstances of the case, such interference with the right of TV or radio stations to freedom of expression did not satisfy the condition “necessary in a democratic society” and, therefore, contravened Article 32 of the Constitution and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

In the light of the “particular importance of freedom of expression for a democratic society, susceptible to political pressure and censorship,” the Constitutional Court noted that the only authority capable, in accordance with the democratic and constitutional principle of separation of powers in the state, of finding that a certain citizen has seriously violated the law, including through abusive exercise of freedom of expression, is the judiciary, which benefits from all guarantees of independence.

The undersigned non-governmental organizations express their regret and disapproval regarding the perpetuation of practices that defy the principle of transparency in the decision-making process, especially in light of the fact that the suspension of a television station’s broadcast license represents an interference with the right to freedom of expression of the press, and public consultation on legislative initiatives affecting this area is of particular importance.

In the context of replicating mechanisms similar to those previously declared unconstitutional, we urge authorities to review relevant legal provisions to ensure their conformity with international standards.

Independent Journalism Center

“Access-info” Center

Amnesty International Moldova

Association of Electronic Press

Legal Resources Center from Moldova

Promo-LEX Association

Centre for Policies and Reforms

Investigative Journalism Center of Moldova

Environment and Ecotourism Journalists’ Association  

Loading

Share This

Copy Link to Clipboard

Copy