«Ytringsfrihed bør finde Sted»

NOU 1999: 27
Kapittel 12 «Ytringsfrihed bør finde Sted» 352
Prohibition of prior censorship
The Commission proposes that the scope of the Constitution?s present prohibition
on prior censorship should be extended from its present application to
printed material to include any form of speech, regardless of the chosen media
(fourth paragraph). This means that today?s censorship of moving pictures –
in relation to an adult audience – must be abolished. Regulations which constitute
a hindrance to the free establishment of channels of communication in the
public sphere may only be maintained in so far as there are technical reasons
for such regulations. The Commission states that the fourth paragraph should
be interpreted as having a restrictive effect on the granting of interim injunctions
against speech. Likewise, the fourth paragraph means that demonstrations
or other public manifestations may not be banned in advance only
because of the prospective demands of the demonstration.
The proposal allows for exemptions from the prohibition of prior censorship
and other preventive measures as far as is necessary to protect minors
from any harmful influence of moving pictures, meaning both cinema films,
video films and other moving images. Private letters to and from inmates in
institutions, inter alia prisons and psychiatric hospitals, may be subject to censorship
provided that such censorship is based on a court order.
Access to information
The Commission proposes that the citizen?s right of access to information
held by the public administration and the courts should be provided for in the
Constitution (fifth paragraph). Any exceptions from the right of access to public
documents or the right to be present at meetings must be prescribed by
law, and such exceptions may only be enacted when overriding considerations
so denote.
State responsibility for providing public speaking facilities
The sixth paragraph of the proposal emphasises the obligation of the state to
create the conditions necessary for an open and enlightened public debate.
The Norwegian state has for decades – even centuries – taken an interest in
the development and maintenance of the public sphere, and the Commission
sees it as important that the state’s obligation in this respect – which is more
of a political than of a legal character – is manifested in the Constitution. The
overall obligation should be to secure a plurality of voices in the public sphere,
which inter alia includes an obligation to help underprivileged groups to be
heard by providing them with the necessary means of addressing a wider audience.
The sixth paragraph means that the state should continue to fund education
and research, should continue to contribute financially – directly or indirectly
– to art, culture, newspapers and magazines (in Norwegian and in
minority languages), public service broadcasting and the variety of organisations.
The paragraph also creates a basis for legislation restricting ownership
concentration in the media.
The members of the Commission
The following 16 persons have been members of the Norwegian Governmental
Commission on Freedom of Expression: