The concept of media pluralism under the European Convention on Human Rights – substantive principles and procedural safeguards

ABSTRACT

European systems have long had rules in place to secure pluralism in media ownership and to ensure that audiences are exposed to diverse content. The role of those regulations has come under increased scrutiny in recent years, as a result of political polarisation and access to international media sources. In NIT Srl v Republic of Moldova (2022), the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights considered the compatibility of rules requiring political impartiality and neutrality in broadcast media coverage with Article 10. In its decision, the Court considered the balance to be struck between two important components of media freedom: pluralism in media content and editorial freedom. Drawing on the decision in NIT, and making a comparison with the decision of the EU General Court in RT v Council of the European Union, this article examines the evolving Article 10 jurisprudence and the role of the ECHR in promoting media pluralism.

KEYWORDS:

• Article 10
• media pluralism
• broadcasting
• impartiality

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 NIT S.R.L. v The Republic of Moldova (App. No. 28470/12), [2022] ECHR 8470/12.

2 Case T-125/22 RT France v Council of the European Union (27 July 2022).

3 See (n 1).

4 Eric Barendt, Freedom of Speech (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2005) 34.

5 ibid 34.

6 ibid 34–35.

7 ibid 35.

8 ibid 35.

9 ibid 36.

10 NIT v Moldova (n 1).

11 ibid [85].

12 ibid [148].

13 ibid [201].

14 ibid [99].

15 ibid [185].

16 ibid [190].

17 ibid [99].

18 ibid [178].

19 ibid (Joint dissenting opinions of Lemmens, Jelic, and Pavli JJ) [6].

20 ibid.

21 RT France v Council (see n 2), at [22].

22 ibid [108].

23 ibid [92].

24 Barendt (n 4) 35–36.