|
Hasty
decision with harmful consequences
09.05.2007
The Albanian Helsinki Committee
has followed with attention and concern the
debate regarding NCRT’s order to remove from the
“Tarabosh” site the antennas of televisions
“Vizion+” and “Top Channel,” which enable the
dissemination of their signal in the territory
of Shkodër.
This drastic and previously
unconsulted decision is claimingly justified
with the need to implement the law, while it is
known that the non-regulation of this issue has
not taken place due to fault of the televisions
affected by the above measure.
AHC is of the opinion that
bureaucratic delays and the lack of political
will are the main reasons for the failure to
amend relevant legislation in a timely manner.
In this sense, the formal
implementation of the law, without taking into
consideration the consequences, among other
things, runs counter to constitutional
principles and the purpose of the law, which aim
at guaranteeing freedom of the media and the
right to information.
AHC appreciates and supports the
reaction of citizens who do not agree with such
a decision, precisely because they are unjustly
deprived of essential information they obtain
through television operators who, as is known,
play an irreplaceable role.
AHC considers the undertaking of
this measure by the NCRT hasty also because of
the fact that the institution itself has
declared the issue will be resolved within a
relatively short time. This is the reason why it
is incomprehensible for the AHC why such a great
haste while it is known that the situation has
been tolerated for years, something admitted
even in the memorandum signed between the NCRT
and the OSCE regarding the frequency mapping.
AHC is of the opinion that the
NCRT did not have to move to the undertaking of
such measures, but could have issued regional or
national licenses in accordance with existing
free areas which, as is said, exist in Albania.
AHC expresses its concern also
about the fact that the NCRT order initially
targets the most powerful television stations
that have justified even before the public their
informative and educational role, as if these
two stations were the greatest violators of the
law. In AHC’s view, such measures create the
impression of selective attitudes, in spite of
statements that this operation will also target
other stations. In AHC’s opinion, if that were
to happen, harmful consequences would just be
more serious. AHC thinks that the NCRT’s primary
duty is to guarantee protection of free meida
and, as a consequence, the uninterrupted and
objective informing of the broad public. In this
aspect, further improvement of legislation in
this area is also important.
AHC deems it necessary to suggest
to the NCRT to revisit the measures taken
against the above television stations and to
ensure the right to information in those areas
where this right is limited.
|
