Back

Themes: Freedom of speech Armenia

Meltex Ltd and Mesrop Movsesyan v. Armenia | 2008

Better licensing procedure for TV stations

The sheer scale of the public protest . . . persuaded us that we had a duty to continue to operate as a news organisation...

Mesrop Movsesyan, A1+'s founder, quoted on the BBC © Photo: Onnik Krikorian

 

Background

A1+ was one of Armenia’s leading independent TV channels before it was abruptly taken off the air in 2002.

In 2000 and 2001, the government had brought in new broadcasting rules, involving the creation of a new licensing procedure. This required TV companies to bid for operating licences in an open competition. A newly created regulator would assess the bids.

A1+’s parent company, Meltex Ltd, bid for a new licence but lost out to a competitor. As a result, A1+ stopped broadcasting on 25 April 2002.

Meltex made six more bids for licences but lost out each time.

Mesrop Movsesyan, A1+’s founder, wanted answers. He kept writing to the regulator demanding a full explanation why Meltex had consistently been denied a licence. Instead, he received standard replies which told him little.

Meltex took legal action against the regulator. However, an Armenian court dismissed the company’s complaints in 2004, saying it had been given “grounds and reasons” for the refusal of its bids.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

The European court ruled that Armenia had breached Meltex’s freedom of expression because the regulator gave no reasons for denying the company a broadcasting licence. This left the licensing procedure open to abuse.

The decision of the Court is a victory for freedom of expression.

Terry Davis, Secretary General of the Council of Europe (2004-2009), quoted in a Council of Europe press release © Photo: Council of Europe

Follow-up

Armenia changed its broadcasting law in June 2010. The new law said that the regulator’s decisions “shall be properly substantiated and reasoned".

It was made clear that the law should be interpreted in line with the European Convention on Human Rights and the European court’s judgment in Meltex’s case.

Meltex made another bid for a broadcasting licence in 2010 but did not win.

Additional information

Themes:

Related examples

An unreasonable ban on a peaceful demonstration leads to reforms to protect free assembly

A human rights NGO planned a march in Yerevan, to commemorate a man who had died in police custody. The Mayor’s office banned the march. The Strasbourg court ruled that the ban had not been properly justified, breaching the NGO’s right to free assembly. After the ban, reforms were made to protect the right to hold public demonstrations in Armenia.

Themes: Freedom of assembly Armenia

Read more

New rules to protect media pluralism after company prevented from broadcasting

Italian television was dominated by a small number of channels, with little diversity of ownership. When Centro Europa 7 tried to set up new channels, they were refused access to a broadcasting frequency. The company complained to the European court that the authorities were maintaining the concentration of media power in Italy. The case led to new rules for protecting media pluralism.

Themes: Freedom of speech Italy

Read more