Avenue de l'Europe
Centro Europa 7 S.R.L and Di Stefano v. Italy 
| 2009
There can be no democracy without pluralism. Democracy thrives on freedom of expression. It is of the essence of democracy to allow diverse political programmes to be proposed and debated, even those that call into question the way a State is currently organised, provided that they do not harm democracy itself.
Judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, 7 June 2012 - © Photo: Wikipedia
Italian television was dominated by a small number of channels, with little diversity of ownership. The company Centro Europa 7 wanted to set up new channels. It was granted a license to broadcast in 1999. However, it could not do so until 2009, because the authorities refused to allocate it any broadcasting frequencies. Instead, the frequencies were given to existing media networks.
The European court said there can be no democracy without media pluralism. If a powerful economic or political group is allowed to dominate television, this could undermine free speech.
The Italian authorities’ refusal to grant Centro Europa 7 a frequency prevented the organisation from broadcasting for almost ten years. This showed that there was not a proper framework in place to guarantee media pluralism in Italy.
New laws and regulations were brought in to protect media pluralism. Licensing is now conducted by an independent regulator, which applies newly clarified regulations on the allocation of broadcasting licenses, the transfer of ownership and avoiding media concentration.
Independent TV channel A1+ was taken off the air after a regulator denied its parent company’s bid for a broadcasting licence. The European court ruled that Armenia had breached the company’s freedom of expression because the regulator gave no reasons for its decisions. Armenia then changed the law to bring the licensing procedure into line with the European Convention on Human Rights.
Four Belgian journalists were targeted by the police in a huge search and seizure operation aimed at identifying the source of leaked government information. The European court ruled that the operation had been unjustified and disproportionate. The case influenced new legislation to improve protections for journalists and their sources.
Ionel Dălban was a Romanian journalist and ran a local weekly magazine, Cronica Romaşcană. He was convicted and given a prison sentence for writing about an alleged fraud by public figures. The European court ruled that the conviction had violated his right to freedom of expression. The case triggered reforms to free speech protections in Romania.
Italy
Armenia
Belgium
Romania
