LATVIA

Expert assessments: Sanctions

The regulation cited by the Hungarian Government is accurate in describing the existing laws and powers of the (now renamed) National Radio and Television Council—which was replaced by the National Electronic Mass Media Council (NEPLP) under a new media law adopted by the Latvian Parliament (Saeima) in July 2010.162 The National Electronic Mass Media Council (NEPLP), which inherited much of the same basic powers from the National Radio and Television Council, is responsible for ensuring that “electronic mass media” do not violate the terms of their licenses or programming and content regulations provided for in Latvia’s media law.163 “Electronic mass media” includes broadcasting, radio, audiovisual on-demand services, public, commercial and non-commercial mass media, but not traditional print media. The NEPLP can impose a range of sanctions on these media for breaches to content regulations, including warnings, fines and license revocations. In practice Latvia’s media authorities rarely use their sanctioning powers and when sporadic sanctions are imposed they are generally not severe. The media authority can forward information related to criminal violations (e.g. content of programming that incites violence) to the prosecutor’s office should such violations be suspected, which did occur in 2009, although it cannot itself “bring prosecutions against” media outlets as the above statement suggests.164

Violations that carry possible sanctions, as well as what standards the media authority applies when weighing its decisions, are explicitly defined in the Electronic Mass Media Law. Penalties are also detailed in the Latvian Administrative Violations Code.165 According to Section 21 of the Electronic Mass Media Law, the National Electronic Mass Media Council can: annul a broadcasting permit if a broadcaster stops broadcasting or broadcasts irregularly; suspend a broadcaster’s operations for up to seven days if that broadcaster has violated the law or failed to comply with the terms of its license; annul a broadcasting permit if the broadcaster has received three administrative punishments in one year, repeats a violation of the law or terms of its license within a month of receiving a warning for the same offence, violates the terms of its broadcast permit, does not broadcast to its entire coverage area, continues a violation for a month after being cited, or is guilty of crimes against the state.166

Section 26 of the Electronic Mass Media Law stipulates a set of restrictions regarding programming content: “programmes and broadcasts of the electronic mass media may not contain: 1) stories which accentuate violence; 2) materials of a pornographic nature; 3) incitement to hatred or discrimination against a person or group of persons on the grounds of sex, race or ethnic origin, nationality, religious affiliation or faith, disability, age or other circumstances; 4) incitement to war or the initiation of a military conflict; 5) incitement to overthrow State power or to change the State political system by violence, to destroy the territorial integrity of the State or to commit any other crime; or 6) stories which discredit the statehood and national symbols of Latvia.” 167 There are also additional restrictions regarding programming quotas for the national language (mandating that at least 80 percent of content be broadcast in Latvian or provide translation in Latvian), as well as regulations on fair commercial practices.

Violations of any of the above-mentioned restrictions are punishable under the Administrative Violations Code, while failure to meet the specific terms of a broadcast permit is a violation of the media law. If the National Electronic Mass Media Council determines there is a violation, it can initiate an administrative procedure. If a media outlet is found guilty of a violation, the Council can either impose a monetary sanction in accordance with the Administration Violations Code or apply other sanctions as provided in Section 21 of the Electronic Mass Media Law. If a media outlet is found to commit three administrative violations during one year, the Council has the right to annul the license.

The Administrative Violations Code clearly details the violations and the assessable penalties that can be levied by the National Electronic Mass Media Council. 168 It includes maximum fines for violating a number of specific provisions. For instance, providing false advertising information carries a fine up to and LVL 10,000 (EUR 14,000) for media companies; failing to register carries a maximum fine of up to LVL 1,500 (EUR 2100); failure to provide translation of the official language of radio and television broadcasts can incur fines of to up LVL 200 (EUR 280) for repeated violations; failure to comply with approved programming concept (fines of up to LVL 2,500);169 and fines for distributing erotic type material carry a maximum fine of LVL 100 (EUR 140) for individuals and LVL 1,000 (EUR 1,400) for media companies.170

Section 66 of the Electronic Mass Media Law establishes the procedures and standards by which the Council must carry out its decisions, which include weighing the usefulness of the necessity of the sanction to attaining the legal goal, whether the fine serves the public interest, and whether the fine would constitute a disproportion restriction of human rights. All administrative decisions can be appealed in administrative court.

As noted above, Electronic Mass Media Council’s sanctioning practices are generally not severe. The occasions of sanctioning are rare and mainly concern rather small and technical issues (commonly for breaches to language quotas). Hence, while the Hungarian Government for the most part correctly describes the Latvian legal framework with regard to sanctions, the example does not adequately address the criticism raised with regard to the excessive sanctioning policies contained in Hungary’s new media system.