EU media freedom, policy and law

The Europe 2020 growth reform strategy and its flagship initiatives, such as the Digital Agenda for Europe, offer opportunities for cross-border learning between the governments and administrations in the European Union.

Information society and ICT issues are among the most dynamic policy areas, where the needs and opportunities are great.


Media freedom high-level group

Some important aspects will be covered by the high-level group to provide recommendations for the respect, protection, support and promotion of media freedom and pluralism in Europe. The group was convened by the Digital Agenda commissioner Neelie Kroes, and it is chaired by the former president of Latvia, professor Vaira Vike-Freiberga. The press release of 11 October 2011 IP/11/1173 is available in 22 official EU languages.

On the Commission's Information Society web page Freedom and Pluralism of the Media the high-level group is called a Committee on Freedom and Pluralism of the Media.


EU media policy

For all those who are interested in EU media policy and law, the Commission's Media Task Force offers an inventory of measures affecting the media (updated April 2011).

On thirty plus pages the inventory offers concentrated views of measures – EU acquis and ongoing - within the following categories of policies across several Commission services:

1. Audiovisual and media policies
2. Electronic communications policy
3. Digital Agenda
4. Research
5. Other policy files with potential media impact
6. References

The short references and notes are augmented by helpful links.


National Digital Agendas

Through Twitter @RalfGrahn and my blog I asked for information if there is a national Digital Agenda in your EU country in the footsteps of the Digital Agenda for Europe.

The invitation remains open. It would be great if you could send me one tweet per language version. Please use the hashtag #DigitalAgenda to spread the word instantly.

If you want to write more, you could use the comments section of this blog or send me an email.

I will try to disseminate the information received.



Ralf Grahn

A Digital Agenda for Europe; Brussels, 26.8.2010 COM(2010) 245 final/2

In the blog post 'Worth remembering: EU Digital Agenda launch' we looked at the press release and the memos relating to the original communication A Digital Agenda for Europe; 19 May 2010 COM(2010) 245, regarding this Europe 2020 (EU2020) flagship initiative.

However, the original communication was later replaced. The corrected version is available in the official languages of the European Union. The communication in English:

CORRIGENDUM:
Annule et remplace le document COM(2010) 245 final du 19.5.2010
Concerne toutes les versions linguistiques

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS
A Digital Agenda for Europe; Brussels, 26.8.2010 COM(2010) 245 final/2 (41 pages)



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Digital technology development tests the rules applicable to (new) media. MediaLaws deals with law and policy of the media in a comparative perspective.

Hungarian EU Council presidency – a PR disaster

Between yesterday and today, even between editing two blog posts this morning, the Facebook group for free media in Hungary keeps growing. A few moments ago 75,578 persons had joined the group, which sets out its reasoned demands in a proclamation published in many European languages.

As a public relations exercise, the start of the Hungarian presidency of the Council of the European Union could hardly have been more catastrophic, but what can a government expect if it attacks European values at home and tells us that it promotes them abroad?

Only rarely, outside the circle of Fidesz supporters and European People's Party (EPP) cronies, do we find defenders of the Hungarian media muzzle law such as Andrea Jamborova in her guest post on the Europolit blog.

More representative of euroblogs and European opinion is the article published yesterday on the Euros du Village, amazed at the muted response from the European Socialists. When Greenyourope compares prime minister Viktor Orban with Hugo Chavez, it is not a compliment. .

Leaving values, principles and politics aside, even on the more restricted grounds of compatibility with EU media law, the Commission has serious doubts about the legality of the Hungarian media act, as noted by Kosmopolito. The letter from the Commission has leaked to the press, so everyone can evaluate the detailed remarks regarding the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and certain treaty principles. .



Ralf Grahn



P.S. On A 12 Stelle, mainly in Italian but also in English, Paolo Maria Grossholz relays EU press releases of interest to businesses. A useful source of information.


P.S. 2: You can follow me on Facebook and on Twitter @RalfGrahn, in addition to my blogs: Grahnlaw (in English), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish), as well as the trilingual Grahnlaw Suomi Finland.

PM Viktor Orban wants to fight against free media in Hungary

Do you beat your wife, but argue that you are such a nice person outside your home that nobody should take you to task?

Which countries do most readily reject criticism of human rights violations as interference in their internal affairs?

***

Prime minister Viktor Orban presented the programme of the Hungarian presidency of the Council of the European Union at the European Parliament plenary in Strasbourg. He was adamant about the illiberal media law:

Finally, Mr Orbán asked MEPs not to confuse the current EU Presidency with Hungary’s internal affairs, whatever their opinions may be. “I am ready to fight”, said the Hungarian prime minister, warning that if the distinction was not made, it would harm the whole of the EU, rather than just Hungary.

Orban's interpretation of ”respect and humility” was in marked contrast with the views of group leaders Martin Schulz (S&D), Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE) and Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Greens/EFA) regarding the fundamental value of freedom of information.

Some might see a message to the Hungarian EU Council presidency from the outgoing Belgian presidency, in the words of prime minister Yves Leterme a day earlier:

As much as about peace, the Union is about liberty, about democracy, about civil rights, about the rule of law, as well for our citizens as for our immigrants. We believe in the right of each person to human dignity, which means to the right to live on their feet and not on their knees, the right to think and speak and worship freely.

According to commissioner Neelie Kroes, the Commission is examining the implementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMS) in Hungary (and other member states). In addition to these narrow legal grounds, president José Manuel Barroso called the freedom of the press a sacred principle, and he called for Orban to understand the political implications.

Andrew Willis on EUobserver noted that PM Orban was met by strong criticism from many members of the European Parliament:

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban met with an unprecedentedly hostile welcome for an incoming EU presidency in the European Parliament on Wednesday (19 January), with MEPs venting strong criticism against Budapest's new media law.

However, PM Orban remained as pugnacious as ever.

Gulf Stream Blues noted Orban's combative mood as well as the timing of the new law:

The only explanations for the timing of this law are that Orban's administration is either extremely naïve or extremely belligerent. Neither bodes well for the potential of the Hungarian presidency to navigate the EU through the next six months of crisis.

Even if PM Orban is impervious to the founding values of the European Union and no EU institution seems to be prepared to enforce them as such, Hungary is party to the (European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, including Article 10 on the Freedom of expression.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. On Verfassungsblog the lawyer, journalist and author Max Steinbeis combines his talents to explain the rulings of the German Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court), in constant interplay with the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Recommended reading.

P.S. 2: You can follow me on Facebook and on Twitter @RalfGrahn.

Deserted by EP majority: EU citizens lead lives of quiet desperation (Updated)

”The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.” Henry David Thoreau, the author of Walden, is back in the European Union, including the European Parliament.

The International Relations and Security Network (ISN) published a background picture by Jeremy Druker of the repressive Hungarian law and other controversial legislation on its way: Hungary's Media Law – Tip of the Iceberg (18 January 2011).

Druker quoted professor and OSCE observer Miklos Haratszi saying:

Still, whatever the outrage in the West, few see that the media package is just the tip of the iceberg of Orban's very far-reaching illiberal, counter-revolution.

The French Brussels based journalist Jean-Sébastien Lefebvre, @jslefebvre on Twitter, has covered various aspects of the Hungarian presidency of the Council of the European Union on his blog, L'expérience européenne.

On the European Union as the last hope for Hungarian media with regard to the new law: Journaliste en Hongrie: ” notre dernier espoir, c'est l'Union européenne ” (29 December 2010).

A broad canvas about the Hungarian EU Council presidency and the history and neighbours of Hungary: La Présidence hongroise, son Histoire et ses voisins (15 January 2011).

The revealing quality of answers from the Hungarian presidency regarding a few of the controversial government measures: L'argumentaire de la Présidence hongroise (18 January 2011).

On Coulisses de Bruxelles, UE, the French journalist and blogger Jean Quatremer, @quatremer on Twitter, speaks about the lost honour of the European Socialists, the second largest group in the European Parliament: Tunisie, Hongrie, l'honneur perdu des socialistes européens (18 January 2011).

Quatremer presents the scene in his opening phrases:

Le groupe socialiste du Parlement européen, présidé par Martin Schulz, a joint ses voix au groupe conservateur du PPE pour bloquer toute résolution sur la révolution tunisienne et sur la suppression de la liberté de la presse en Hongrie à la consternation des Verts, de la GUE (gauche non socialiste) et des… libéraux et démocrates. Ces deux groupes ayant la majorité à eux deux, l’Europarlement restera donc muet, lui qui est si prompt à condamner la moindre atteinte aux droits de l’homme à condition qu’elle ait lieu à l’extérieur de la zone d’influence de l’Union…

Quatremer's conclusions about the group of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) in the EP is not rosy for those who hope to see a principled defence of the founding values of the European Union and the liberties of all EU citizens:

Sur la Hongrie, le groupe S&D (Alliance progressiste des socialistes européens) est encore plus vaseux si cela est possible : il veut attendre que la Commission européenne dise en quoi la loi sur les médias adoptée par le parlement hongrois est contraire au droit européen, comme si cela n’était pas évident.

Démocratie, liberté de la presse : les socialistes européens ne semblent vraiment plus savoir ce que sont les valeurs européennes qui fondent l’Union et doivent être défendues tant à l’intérieur qu’à l’extérieur. Après cela, étonnez-vous que la gauche soit en perte de vitesse dans l’Union. Au moins la droite est-elle conséquente en condamnant Cuba et en soutenant la Tunisie de Ben Ali…

Quatremer's text was so damning that I felt the need to check the S&D newsroom, where I found a press release from group leader Martin Schulz (in French). Even if Schulz mentions European values, his statement reduces the issue to an assessment by the Commission of compatibility with EU law:

Le Premier ministre Hongrois, Monsieur Viktor Orban, devrait s'assurer de la modification de cette loi si l'incompatibilité avec le droit européen est avérée, et pour cela, la Commission européenne doit agir en jouant pleinement son rôle qui découle du Traité a conclu Martin Schulz.

Update 19 January 2011: Added link to S&D press release Martin Schulz.

Update 2, 20 January 2011: S&D group leader Martin Schulz has written to the Coulisses de Bruxelles, and Jean Quatremer has commented.

***

In this instance I understand why Quatremer was somewhat hesitant about the position of the Liberals and Democrats, as reflected in the ALDE press release, leaving the field to the Greens and the Left.

This morning in Strasbourg the European Parliament is going to discuss the programme of activities of the Hungarian presidency of the EU Council. By the looks of it, in the terms of practical action neither the Hungarian government nor the EP majority seems to put the founding values of the European Union first.

Is there any alternative to despair?



Ralf Grahn



P.S. The Franco-German blog vasistas? battles for the freedom of EU citizens on the Internet, so there is little risk of running out of challenges to discuss any time soon. @vasistas_blog is also worth following on Twitter.


P.S. 2: You can follow me on Facebook and on Twitter @RalfGrahn.

Painful reading for an EU citizen: Hungarian media law in EP

After the discussion about the importance of EU founding values – for the citizens of the European Union and for the EU in the wider world – it was painful to read the press summary from the European Parliament: Hungarian media law sparks controversy at the European Parliament (18 January 2011).

Instead of putting European founding values and citizens first, the representatives of the European People's Party (EPP) persisted in legal sophistry and in belittling the issues at stake.

I had hoped that the unfortunate early comments from EPP leaders such as group leader Joseph Daul and EPP president Wilfried Martens would – on reflection – have been scrapped in favour of a principled approach from the strongest political group in the EP, the other EU institutions and the member states.

I was wrong, painfully wrong.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. After a week of technical problems, the multilingual aggregator Bloggingportal.eu is again online, bringing you the posts from 732 Euroblogs. European political awareness is needed more than ever.

Domestic legislation as an embarrassment for the EU (Hungarian media law)

Politically, already serious discussion about the commencement of proceedings is an embarrassment for a wayward government, despite the slender risk of condemnation, I said in my comment regarding the founding values of the European Union in Article 2 TEU and the possible sanctions for serious breaches foreseen in Article 7 TEU: Are EU founding values effective? (Hungarian media law)(11 January 2011).

Governments in the European Union (and beyond) want to be seen as respectable, even when their actions are not. The Hungarian Fidesz government of Viktor Orban moved from angry denial to more conciliatory language in order to defuse the problem, but the embarrassment must be felt by their political friends, such as Wilfried Martens, the president of the European People's Party, who endorsed the Hungarian media law, and EPP group leader Joseph Daul, who belittled and procrastinated instead of taking a principled stand for the rights of EU citizens. .

I have no special desire to see the EPP leadership with egg on its face, but the freedoms and rights of EU citizens are more important to me than misplaced consideration for blatant political misjudgments.

In summary, even when national political leaders think that they can act with impunity domestically, they can cause serious political damage to their country and their ”friends” at the European level.


International repercussions

The potential damage is not limited to intra-European affairs. Internationally the European Union portrays itself as the champion of the universal values of human rights. The foreign, security, defence and trade policy (external action) of the European Union is not based on interests alone, but on acting in accordance with and promoting the founding values of the EU.

This is (or should be) more than wishful thinking, since Title V of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), General provisions on the Union's external action and specific provisions on the foreign and security policy, opens by stating the value based character of all EU action on the world stage, in Article 21(1) TEU:

GENERAL PROVISIONS ON THE UNION’S EXTERNAL ACTION

Article 21 TEU

1. The Union’s action on the international scene shall be guided by the principles which have inspired its own creation, development and enlargement, and which it seeks to advance in the wider world: democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.

The Union shall seek to develop relations and build partnerships with third countries, and international, regional or global organisations which share the principles referred to in the first subparagraph. It shall promote multilateral solutions to common problems, in particular in the framework of the United Nations.

Evidently, if the European Union, even by individual member states, slips at home, it loses credibility abroad. In other words, a domestic embarrassment becomes a global shame.

Dictators and authoritarian rulers are quick enough to praise their rule(s), if a ”fifth column” inside the EU passes the ammunition.

On the website of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) and in the Social Europe Journal, Susi Dennison made the point about double standards and welcomed a debate at European level (7 January 2011):

... it has to be a positive development that a political conversation has finally started about these matters at a European level. A Union that has in its founding treaties respect for democracy, rule of law and human rights cannot credibly turn a blind eye to potential breaches of these principles by constituent states.

Member states and Europarties

In the eyes of EU citizens and the wider world, the acts of national governments can seriously undermine the purposes and credibility of the European Union. The member states who ”own” the union and the Europarties who are supposed to contribute to forming European political awareness and to express the will of the citizens of the union have special responsibilities, including robust peer pressure on bad apples.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Thoughtful analysis, reasoned arguments, European perspectives … already as an undergraduate Conor Slowey aka Eurocentric wrote one of star blogs of the Euroblogosphere, The European Citizen. Now a graduate student in Leiden, he is a generous contributor on Facebook and on Twitter as @EuropeanCitizen. Highly recommended.

Are EU founding values effective? (Hungarian media law)

In the Social Europe Journal, Gabor Gyori explained that the tribulations of democracy in Hungary could not be framed in the terms of dictatorship or its opposite. There were many other problems besides the new media law. For the sake of Hungary and the whole EU, the union must start taking democracy and the rule of law as seriously as economic issues: For Hungary, the Issue is not Dictatorship but the Quality of Democracy (10 January 2011).

The 47 member states of the pan-European Council of Europe have committed themselves to the European values enshrined in many treaties, most notably the (European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR).

There are at least three lines of defence. First, the member states are supposed to live up to their promises voluntarily. Second, the CoE officials and intergovernmental bodies try to deal with emerging problems politically. Third, ultimately the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rules on applications ”after all domestic remedies have been exhausted”, so it is a slow and laborious road, but the member states have undertaken to abide by the final judgment of the Court. Abidance is monitored by the CoE.

As I tried to explain yesterday, there are pan-European values, common to all CoE members, not Western European, Central European or Eastern European values and norms designed to give people in Central or Eastern Europe less protection than their more fortunate counterparts in the older CoE members in the West: European values and Hungarian media law: ECHR (10 January 2011).


European Union values

The European Union (EU) is a tight and deep political union, as opposed to the intergovernmental Council of Europe, so it would be natural to expect the EU to be better equipped to deal with deviant behaviour against the freedoms and rights of its citizens.

In addition, the Lisbon Treaty was marketed as an improvement for citizens in many respects: more democratic, fundamental rights, citizens' initiative etc.


EU founding values

Let us look at the bright side of life. In my view, the founding values of the European Union are admirable (OJEU 30.3.2010 C 83/17):

Article 2 TEU

The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.

(You can notice the inclusion among the founding values of ”the rights of persons belonging to minorities”, treasured by a Hungary solicitous about 3.5 million ethnic Hungarians outside its borders.)


Outsiders

As long as states remain candidates for EU accession, they have to convince all the member states that they respect these founding values and that they are committed to promoting them (Article 49 TEU).


Insiders

Once inside, a member state is less at risk legally, because the hurdles against sanctions are still quite high. According to Article 7 TEU, the Council needs to determine by a four fifths majority that there is a ”clear risk of a serious breach” of the founding values by a member state.

The process can be initiated by a third of the member states, by the European Parliament or by the European Commission. The procedure can lead to recommendations.

Real legal sanctions are possible only when a unanimous European Council determines a ”serious and persistent breach” by a member state.

Legally, we have a blunt weapon, not especially well adapted to minor but important infringements by member states' governments.

Politically, already serious discussion about the commencement of proceedings is an embarrassment for a wayward government, despite the slender risk of condemnation.

However, it requires a degree of moral courage from the institutional players involved to get even a principled discussion going.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. The Daniel Mason writes The Endless Track, a British Euroblog refreshingly interested in actual EU policies and the place of South Yorkshire within the European Union. You can follow @danmason21 on Twitter when he hopefully returns with new tweets.

European values and Hungarian media law: ECHR

The discussion about the Hungarian media law prone to arbitrary implementation has revealed profound ignorance about or lack of care for European values, even outright denial of their existence.

For the legal text (to the extent that the Act has been translated) you can go to Politics.hu:

Act CLXXXV of 2010 on media services and mass media (in English)

The text on Politics.hu is followed by a lot of comments discussing the law (48 by now), even if they reflect only a tiny proportion of an ongoing discussion in many media articles and blog posts.


Grahnlaw

I have tried to shed some light on political and legal aspects of freedom of speech in Europe in earlier blog posts:

Help EPP group leader Joseph Daul defend media freedom (5 January 2011)

EPP president Wilfried Martens versus Free Press for Hungary (5 January 2011)

Hungarian media law and EU Council presidency: Evolving European opinion (8 January 2011)

Hungary: Is free speech a socialist issue? (9 January 2011)

Presidency or Troll? Describing itself as the unofficial troll blog of the Hungarian presidency, EUphobia made its confused and confusing appearance on the Euroblog scene: The Party has Started (8 January 2011). If I understand the blog entry and the following discussion correctly, the Hungarian media law is bad, but press freedom needs to be suppressed in Hungary for partisan reasons. EUphobia seems to imply that there are no European standards to uphold.


Council of Europe (CoE)

All the members of the European Union (EU) are members of the pan-European Council of Europe (CoE) and thus parties to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), an evolving system of protection of the rights of citizens against abuse by governments and public authorities, as shown by the preamble:

The governments signatory hereto, being members of the Council of Europe,

Considering the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 10th December 1948;

Considering that this Declaration aims at securing the universal and effective recognition and observance of the Rights therein declared;

Considering that the aim of the Council of Europe is the achievement of greater unity between its members and that one of the methods by which that aim is to be pursued is the maintenance and further realisation of human rights and fundamental freedoms;

Reaffirming their profound belief in those fundamental freedoms which are the foundation of justice and peace in the world and are best maintained on the one hand by an effective political democracy and on the other by a common understanding and observance of the human rights upon which they depend;

Being resolved, as the governments of European countries which are like-minded and have a common heritage of political traditions, ideals, freedom and the rule of law, to take the first steps for the collective enforcement of certain of the rights stated in the Universal Declaration,

Have agreed as follows: ---

The ratifying states have not only declared their profound belief in the fundamental freedoms, but pledged a common understanding and observance of human rights, which are legally binding in every member state of the CoE.

In short, the purpose is to give citizens' rights and freedoms teeth:

Article 1 – Obligation to respect human rights

The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention.

Key word ”secure”.


Freedom of expression

Section 1 of the ECHR contains Article 10, which enshrines the freedom of expression:

Article 10 – Freedom of expression

1.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 and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2.The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

This text binds national legislators, governments and public administrations, as well as Courts. Ultimately observance of the engagements undertaken by the member states is ensured by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). (See Article 19)

As we see, some restrictions are possible on freedom of expression, but they have to be strictly justifiable. Let me make just two points: 1) ”Interference” by public authority is a much wider concept than crude prior censorship; 2) Conditions have to be prescribed by law, ”necessary in a democratic society” and they have to be based on the enumerated grounds.

Rich pickings are available on the ECtHR's search portal Hudoc for those who are interested in case law can find. I link to newer cases concerning ECHR Article 10.


The good fight

In the end governments miss the whole purpose of protecting the health of their democratic system and the rights of individuals if they propel themselves into a race to the bottom and a competition who can get away with the least.

We are, at least hopefully, dealing with the rights of humans, not maximising those of governments at the expense of citizens, despite the obvious temptations.

Individual politicians, politcal parties at national and European level, legislatures, governments and public authorities should compete to improve the standards and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including free speech, in order to be able to claim at the end of the day: I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith.

This is what European values are about.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Anarchic in spirit, but vigilant for the rights of EU netizens is @telecomix on Twitter, describing itself in the following terms: The Telecomix News Agency aims to inform about the telecoms package, ACTA, data retention, net neutrality and censorship within EU and the rest of the world. Worth following.

Hungarian media law and EU Council presidency: Evolving European opinion

A measure of European public opinion is already reflected on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu, which aggregates 732 Euroblogs. The Hungarian media law is one of the recurring themes on the front page.

Naturally, there is an impact from the fact that the Bloggingportal.eu blog called for action against censorship in Hungary (21 December 2010), but all journalists, newspapers and bloggers follow their own conscience and express their own views. There is a link to OSCE's legal analysis, and sixty comments present some of the reactions to the call.


Hungary topics page

Let us turn to the topics page on Hungary to see the impression the Fidesz (member of the European People's Party, EPP) government of Viktor Orban has made among European journalists and bloggers.You can see the Hungary topics page for yourself (and return for possible updates), but I will refer to and comment on a few blog posts at a time.


Netzpolitik

Netzpolitik.org was one of the first European blogs outside Hungary to react to the media law (in German): Hintergründe zum ungarischen Mediengesetz (21 December 2010). The informative blog post is followed by 47 comments with complementing views and links.


Metronaut

China is great in many ways. However, when we speak about freedom of opinion, the parallel with China is hardly flattering for an EU member state, but this is how Metronaut referred to the Hungarian media law due to its authoritarian character (in German): Zensur in Ungarn: China mitten in Europa (22 December 2010).

Metronaut wondered at the silence from European governments (with the exception of Luxembourg).


EESC

Vice-president Anna Maria Darmanin, responsible for communication at the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), wrote on her blog at the EESC website that the media law casts a black cloud over the commencement of the Hungarian Presidency, and that she believed that any attempt to reduce the freedom expression is a direct attack on democracy and in the longer term a disservice to the whole country and its citizens. Darmanin joined the Bloggingportal.eu action against censorship: Hungary's media law raises eyebrows and concerns (22 December 2010).

***

When I reread these blog posts, I find them serious and reasoned, hardly evil spirited, party political or emotional outbursts of the kind Hungarian government representatives have depicted. But, dear readers, that is for you to judge.



Ralf Grahn

P.S. I want you, my readers and friends, to follow blogs on European issues and – why not – start blogging yourselves. Today I want to highlight the blog of Irish Eroblogger Stephen Spillane, who deals with current issues in Europe and Ireland.

EPP president Wilfried Martens versus Free Press for Hungary

A short while ago 2,129 persons had already joined the new Facebook group Free Press For Hungary. International Version.

Established earlier, the Hungarian version had attracted 54,834 supporters against the authoritarian media law of the government of Viktor Orban.

There are many convincing media reports and blog posts about the essentials of the Hungarian censorship law, but translations into English and other EU languages would be most welcome for those who want to study the legislation in detail.


EPP ”dominant position”

The European People's Party likes to remind editors of its importance:

The EPP is the largest and most influential European-level political party of the centre-right, which currently includes 73 member-parties from 39 countries, the Presidents of the Commission, Council, and Parliament, 14 EU and 6 non-EU heads of state and government, 13 members of the European Commission and the largest Group in the European Parliament.

Update 2, 5 January 2011: Actually even this note is too modest. If the president of the Council means the rotating presidency, now held by EPP member party Fidesz in the Hungarian government of Viktor Orban, the text forgets to mention the president of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy.


From EU competition law and policy we know the concept ”abuse of a dominant position”.

We have seen all too many examples of cronyism, turning a blind eye and abdication of responsiblity from the EPP in various situations.

This is why we have to ask: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


Top down reform

The real low water mark internationally was recorded by the EPP chairman Wilfried Martens who actively lauded the Hungarian media (censorship) law as an improvement ”with the aim to strengthen the freedom of the press, the culture of respect, the protection of minors and human dignity”.

I would like to see the biggest Europarty, the European People's Party, taking the greatest responsibility for our basic values, but instead I realise the need for a crash course from the top down concerning the European Convention on Human Rigths (ECHR), the founding values of the European Union (Article 2 TEU), the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rigths of the European Union (Article 6 TEU) and the process to start determining a serious breach of the founding values (Article 7 TEU).

They are the cornerstones of European integration and for the citizens of the European Union, and they should be for the EPP (otherwise it is ineligible for Europarty funds).

Perhaps EU citizens could tweet @MartensEPP before his Europarty has become even more discredited.

I am not against the European People's Party. On the contrary, I want a better EPP and a better EU for voters, citizens and businesses of the European Union. Taking a principled approach is the only salvation from the current morass.


Update 5 January 2011: Thanks to Andreas Müllerleile who pointed out an English translation of the Hungarian Act on Media Services and Mass Media (about 200 pages).



Ralf Grahn


P.S. Despite the diminished stature of the presidency of the Council of the European Union, the government of Hungary has deservedly gained an astonishing amount of visibility in a few days, as seen on the front page of Bloggingportal.eu, the multiligual aggregator of 729 Euroblogs. Should we congratulate PM Orban on the achievement?