Concerns over allocation of broadcasting licences to private electronic media

(ARTICLE 19/IFEX) – ARTICLE 19 has expressed concern about certain aspects of the recent process of allocating broadcasting licences to private electronic media in the Republic of Macedonia. Among the concerns is an apparent lack of independent decision-making. The Macedonian Law on Broadcasting Activity [Law No 08-1490/1 of 24 April 1997] guarantees the independence of […]

(ARTICLE 19/IFEX) – ARTICLE 19 has expressed concern about certain aspects
of the recent process of allocating broadcasting licences to private
electronic media in the Republic of Macedonia.

Among the concerns is an apparent lack of independent decision-making. The
Macedonian Law on Broadcasting Activity [Law No 08-1490/1 of 24 April 1997]
guarantees the independence of the Broadcasting Council whose members are
chosen by Parliament (Article 23). However, the Broadcasting Council is
empowered only to make recommendations on who should be given licences based
on the conditions defined in the law (Article 16). These recommendations
then have to be approved by the government (Article 13).

In this connection, following the first round of applications under the Law
on Broadcasting Activity, two of the television stations proposed by the
Broadcasting Council for local licences did not receive approval from the
government. These stations were TV Festa in Kumanovo and TV Uskana in
Kicevo. One hundred and fifty-one other licence applications were approved,
but there are concerns that the government did not to agree to allocate
licences to all those recommended by the Broadcasting Council.

In addition, the Law on Broadcasting Activity does not include any process
for applicant media to challenge the denial of a licence application.
Macedonia does not have a relevant administrative law by which such a
challenge can be brought. It is apparently possible that Macedonia’s general
law on concessions could be used to challenge the recommendations of the
Broadcasting Council and the decisions of the Government, but that this is
neither a clear nor an easy process.

Moreover, even if a suitable appeals mechanism did exist, the lack of
openness and transparency in the process by which licences were allocated
would appear to make it impossible for a successful challenge to be mounted.
This is contrary to Article 8 of the Broadcast Law, which refers to
“openness for free competition”, and Article 13, paragraph 4 of which
indicates that bids will be submitted under a process of “open competition”.
In particular, Article 28, paragraph 1 states “The work of the Council is
public”.

Neither the Broadcasting Council nor the Government has reportedly made
public the reasons for the decisions on licence allocation. This is despite
the fact that when applying for licences applicants apparently were required
to sign a document agreeing that information included in their application
could be made public.

This lack of clarity regarding the reasons for granting licences to some
applicants while refusing others, whether at the initial stage or following
a positive recommendation by the Broadcasting Council, has given rise to
speculation that some decisions on licensing could have been motivated by
political considerations.

As well, once an application has been approved by the government, the
licence-holder has to undergo a further process of registration with the
Ministry of Telecommunications in order to be approved to use transmitters.
However, it is not clear whether this is a purely technical requirement or
whether it could result in an approved licence-holder being denied
permission to broadcast.

Recommended Action

His Excellency Kiro Gligorov

President of the Republic of Macedonia

Skopje, Republic of Macedonia

Fax: +389 91 112 147

Copies to:
Tito Petovski

President of the Parliament of the Republic of Macedonia
Ljubomir Jakimovski

President of the Broadcasting Council of Macedonia
care of the Macedonian diplomatic representative to your country