Free_Law_Journal-Vol.. - Free World Publishing Inc.

More documents

Recommendations

Info

FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 (18 JULY 2005) 2. ATTEMPTS FOR REGULATION AT EUROPEAN LEVEL Connected with the introduction of new technologies, growing internationalisation of media activities carried the concentration problem to international level. But international or so called supranational law seems to be far from being able to constitute a corresponding regulatory framework. Neither of the two basic European legal sources regarding broadcasting, namely the Television Without Frontiers Directive adopted by the European Community in 1989 and the European Convention on Transfortier Television put into effect by the members of Council of Europe in 1993, include provisions dealing with the problems caused by ownership concentration. In fact, these were from the outset coherent texts prepared with a common view of maintaining a European single media market 28 . The Convention has been amended in 2002 and realigned with the Directive which was revised in 1997 29 . The first institutional calls for Europe-wide regulation of media ownership came from the European Parliament in 1984. In several resolutions released in following years European Parliament stressed the danger of concentration and declared the necessity of legislative intervention in favour of pluralism in media structure. Consequently the European Commission attempted to prepare a special directive dealing with the issue. But the long consultation period in 1990’s witnessed so wide controversies and disputes that it could not result in adoptation of any directive 30 . The failure to have a regulatory instrument at European level leads to leaving the media ownership and concentration matters to the national legislators 31 . 3. DEVELOPMENTS IN TURKISH LAW 3.1. Evolution in General In Turkey, broadcasting services were under direct state control at the beginning. An important step for the system was the establishment of Turkish Radio and Television Corporation (TRT) in 1964, in accordance with the Constitution of 1961 which stipulated that broadcasting activities should be carried out by an independent and autonomous body. TRT was kept as a constitutional public institution having the monopoly of broadcasting for a long time. In neither 1961 nor the new 1982 Constitution that replaced the old one there was a permission for free private broadcasting. The lack of legality, however, could not prevent the activities of private companies in both radio and television sectors. The first so called ‘pirate’ television channel started broadcasting in 1990 and the others followed it. The illegal and quick emergence of the stations forced the Parliament to make an 28 Levy, op.cit., pp. 41-47; Cavallin, supra note 3; Alison Harcourt, “The European Commission and Regulation of Media Industry”, http://www.medialaw.ru/laws/other_laws/european/e-eh.htm 29 Stefaan Verhulst, David Goldberg, “The European Institutions”, Goldberg, Prosser, Verhulst (eds), op.cit., pp. 157-158; Revised text of European Convention on Transfortier Television and its Explanatory Report is available at http://www.coe.int/T/E/Human_Rights/media/2_Transfortier_Television 30 Levy, op.cit., pp. 50-59; Verhulst, Goldberg, op.cit., p. 167; Media Diversity in Europe, supra note 2, p. 10; Harcourt, Ibid. 31 Media Diversity in Europe, Ibid. For a recent call for a common action against concentration see Transnational Media Concentration in Europe, Report prepared by AP-MD (Advisory Panel on Media Diversity) for CDMM (Council of Europe Steering Committee on Mass Media), Strasbourg, 2004. 131 DR. SAIM UYE - PLURALITY OF OPINION VERSUS CONCENTRATION OF OWNERSHIP : RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TURKISH MEDIA LAW
FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 (18 JULY 2005) amendment to the Constitution in 1993, by which the monopoly of TRT was eliminated and private broadcasting was legalized. Until 1994 there was no special legislation dealing with the structure and activity of private broadcasting. In that year the Law on the Establishment of Radio and Television Enterprises and Their Broadcasts (Law No. 3984 of 20 April 1994) was passed by the Parliament. In 2002 some provisions of this Law have been amended (Law No. 4756 of 21 May 2002). 3.2. Legal Framework of Broadcasting 3.2.1. The Constitution Article 26 of the Constitution which guarantees the right to express and disseminate opinion in general, governs also freedom of broadcasting. The first paragraph of this Article stipulates that, Everyone has the right to express and disseminate his thoughts and opinion by speech, in writing or in pictures or through other media, individually or collectively. This right includes the freedom to receive and impart information and ideas without interference from official authorities. This provision shall not preclude subjecting transmission by radio, television, cinema and similar means to a system of licensing. Article 133/I of the Constitution reads as, Radio and television stations shall be established and administered freely in conformity with rules to be governed by law. 3.2.2. Legislation The Law on the Establishment of Radio and Television Enterprises and Their Broadcasts (Law no. 3984 of 20 April 1994 amended by the Law no. 4756 of 21 May 2002) –hereinafter to be referred as Broadcasting Law– represents the Law that is required to regulate the broadcasting system in the above mentioned Article 133/I of the Constitution. It comprises the basic rules which cover, among other things such as licensing procedure, broadcasting standards, content of programmes, right of reply, advertisements etc., the regulation of the structure. 3.2.3. Radio and Television Supreme Council As a requirement of the Broadcasting Law, the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTUK) has been established. This is an autonomous public body whose duty is to determine and publish secondary rules in order to regulate and monitor the broadcasting system in compliance with the primary legislation. RTUK has the power to impose administrative sanctions varying in a range from a simple warning to the revocation of the license 32 . 32 http://www.rtuk.gov.tr DR. SAIM UYE - PLURALITY OF OPINION VERSUS CONCENTRATION OF OWNERSHIP : RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TURKISH MEDIA LAW 132
Page 1 and 2:
FREE LAW JOURNAL IN THIS ISSUE : Vo
Page 3 and 4:
FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
INTRODUCTION FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOL
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
2. PARTICULAR ISSUES FREE LAW JOURN
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
entitlement to national participati
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Free Law Journal - Volume 1, Number
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Issues Relating to Law of the Sea F
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
FREE WORLD PUBLISHING Inc. HTTP://W
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
y FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMB
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76: FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER
Page 125: FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER
show all

Free_Law_Journal-Vol.. - Free World Publishing Inc.

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?