ქართულენოვანი ვერსია ხელმისაწვდომია აქ.
Author: Ketevan Kukava
On 1 March 2022, the Council of the European Union, a
body consisting of government ministers from EU member states, adopted a Decision and a Regulation that prohibited the broadcasting of the following
media outlets in the EU: RT/Russia Today (RT England, RT UK, RT Germany, RT
France, RT Spanish) and Sputnik. Initially, this restrictive measure was
introduced until 31 July 2022, afterward, on 26 July 2022, it was prolonged until 31 January 2023.
According
to the Council, the Russian
Federation has engaged in a propaganda campaign justifying and supporting its
aggression against Ukraine, targeting civil society in the European Union and
neighbouring countries, by grievously distorting and manipulating the facts
and, in order to do so, using certain media outlets under the direct or
indirect control of the leadership of the Russian Federation. RT France brought
an action for annulment before the General Court against the acts of the
Council.
The General
Court, sitting as the Grand Chamber, observed, first, that,
having regard to the purposes of the common foreign and security policy (CFSP),
the Council has a great deal of latitude in defining the objective of the
restrictive measures that the European Union adopts in this field. From that
perspective, the Council could not be criticised for having considered that the
necessary measures to be taken in response to the serious threat to peace at
Europe’s borders and the infringement of international law could also include
the temporary prohibition on content broadcasting by certain media outlets
funded by the Russian State, on the ground that those outlets would support Russia’s
military aggression against Ukraine.
As regards
the complaint alleging infringement of the freedom of expression and
information, guaranteed by Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the European Union, the Court recalled that the Council can
adopt restrictive measures capable of limiting RT France’s freedom of
expression, provided that such limitations satisfy certain conditions which
must be met in order for that freedom to be legitimately restricted. According to Article 52(1) of the Charter, “any limitation
on the exercise of the rights and freedoms recognised by this Charter must be
provided for by law and respect the essence of those rights and freedoms.
Subject to the principle of proportionality, limitations may be made only if
they are necessary and genuinely meet objectives of general interest recognised
by the Union or the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others.”
First, the Court held that the interference was prescribed by law, under Article 29 TEU and Article 215 TFEU. According to the former, “the Council shall adopt decisions which
shall define the approach of the Union to a particular
matter of a geographical or thematic nature.” The latter provides that where a
decision, adopted in accordance with Chapter 2 of Title V of the TEU (specific
provisions on the Common Foreign and Security Policy), provides for the
interruption or reduction, in part or completely, of economic and financial
relations with one or more third countries, the Council shall adopt the
necessary measures. The Council may adopt restrictive measures against natural
or legal persons and groups or non-State entities.
According
to the judgment, having regard to
the wide discretion enjoyed by the Council to
adopt restrictive measures, it was sufficiently foreseeable that
restrictive measures in the form
of a prohibition on the dissemination of propaganda could be adopted against RT
France, given the extensive media support for Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine,
provided during programmes broadcast on television and on the internet by a
media outlet wholly funded by the Russian State. Therefore, the condition that
the limitations on freedom of expression must be provided for by the
law is satisfied in the present
case (§§
150-152).
Second, on respecting the essence
of freedom of expression, the Court noted that the ban was temporary and
reversible, as it applied until 31 July 2022, and was subject to constant
monitoring. Besides, the ban did not prevent RT France from carrying out
activities other than broadcasting, such as research and interviews, while the
ban did not prohibit the applicant from broadcasting its content outside the
European Union (§§ 154;
156-157).
Regarding
the condition relating to the pursuit of an objective of general interest, the General Court pointed out that the
Council aims to pursue the objective of protecting the Union’s public order and
security, which are threatened by the systematic propaganda campaign put in
place by the Russian Federation through media outlets controlled by the Russian
leadership (§ 161). Moreover, the
restrictive measures in question are consistent with the objective referred to
in Article 21(2)(c) TEU of preserving peace, preventing conflicts and
strengthening international security, in accordance with the aims and
principles of the United Nations Charter (§ 163). Accordingly, the condition relating to the pursuit of an
objective of general interest is satisfied.
The General
Court found that bearing in mind the extraordinary
context of the case, the circumstances are sufficient to establish that the
limitations on RT France’s freedom of expression which the restrictive measures
at issue are liable to have are proportionate,
inasmuch as they are appropriate and necessary, to the aims pursued. Notably, other
measures would not have achieved the same result, since some of them, such as
the ban on the broadcasting of certain content, would have been practically
impossible to implement, while others, such as the obligation to display a
banner or even a warning, would have been of limited effectiveness (§ 197).
In conclusion, no violation of
RT France’s freedom of expression was found and, subsequently, there was no
violation of the public’s right to receive information.
No comments:
Post a Comment