Further to our correspondence on the above subject, please find herewith some information on your two questions concerning (1) jurisdiction under Articles 2 and 2a of the "Television without Frontiers" Directive and (2) licensing regimes.

(1) Implementation of Articles 2 and 2a of the "Television without Frontiers" Directive

Under the Europe Agreement and the Accession Partnership between the EU and Bulgaria, full alignment of Bulgarian audiovisual law with the 89/552/EC Directive should indeed start in 1998, since it is "only" a medium-term priority. In any case, taking that Directive into account, as well as the Council of Europe "Transfrontier Television" Convention (which should be amended rapidly in accordance with the new EU provisions), might be helpful in an increasingly transnational economic context. This is the case not only for political reasons but also because it provides useful indications on how different principles, e.g. the freedom of establishment, or the freedom to provide services across frontiers, can be laid down in law.

As regards the precise wording for national provisions implementing Articles 2 and 2a, however, one should bear in mind that these provisions cover two basic issues. The first principle is that of jurisdiction, laid down in Article 2. Following extensive case law on the subject, the amended Directive wishes to clarify the Member State's jurisdiction under which a given television broadcaster falls. This is mainly determined by:

the location of its central administration and

the place where management decisions concerning programming are taken.

The second issue is the principle of freedom of reception and retransmission, as stated in Article 2a. The latter confirms that, as a general rule, the Member States must ensure the freedom of reception of programmes and may not restrict the retransmission on their territories of programmes from other Member States for reasons falling within the fields coordinated by the Directive.

Obviously, the straightforward reproduction of the text of Articles 2 and 2a is a first way of implementing these two Articles. Since you mentioned that this would not be feasible (under Bulgarian Law?), and that, in any case, such implementation is rarely chosen by Member States, an alternative might be to provide a "summarized" set of provisions. For instance, subject to modifications in accordance with the Bulgarian Law system the text might read:

"Jurisdiction Article

1. All television broadcasts transmitted by broadcasters under Bulgarian jurisdiction shall comply with the laws and regulations applicable to broadcasts intended for the public in Bulgaria.

2. Broadcasters under Bulgarian jurisdiction are the broadcasters which have their establishment in Bulgaria. "Establishment" under the present Article refers to the location of the head office of the broadcaster and the place where editorial decisions are taken, in accordance with the international commitments of Bulgaria.

3. In addition to paragraph 2, broadcasters shall be regarded as being under Bulgarian jurisdiction in the following cases:

(a) when they use a frequency granted by Bulgaria;

(b) when, although they do not use a frequency granted by Bulgaria, they use Bulgarian satellite capacity;

(c) when, although they use neither a frequency granted by Bulgaria nor Bulgarian satellite capacity, they use a satellite uplink located in Bulgaria."

"Freedom of reception and retransmission Article

1. In accordance with the international commitments of Bulgaria, freedom of reception of foreign television broadcasts shall be ensured and retransmissions thereof shall not be restricted on the national territory."

In addition to these provisions, written reference should then be made, in the preamble of the law or at the time of publication in the Bulgarian Official Journal, to the European Agreement of 1995, as well as to the "Television without Frontiers" Directive. Mention should also be made of the Council of Europe Convention on Transfrontier Television (Article 9 of which will doubtless be modified in accordance with the Directive as amended in 1997).

(2) Licensing regimes

For readily understandable reasons, the EBU does not have extensive dealings with licensing issues, which essentially concern commercial television. Nevertheless, it should be borne in mind that divergent traditions exist in the various EU Member States with respect to the different kinds of licences, whether they be analogue or digital terrestrial broadcasting, licensing of frequencies, cable distribution, CATV, satellite transmissions, etc. This makes it difficult to give a full answer to your fairly general query.

However, I would draw your attention to the following points:

1. Another important element is that a broadcasting licence should be awarded before any potential telecommunications licence for the corresponding frequencies is provided. Otherwise it is difficult to make a reality of programming policy and other media requirements.

2. As far as analogue terrestrial broadcasting licences are concerned, it should be noted that such licences are often essential for the national regulatory authorities or governments to be able to impose or negotiate conditions with respect to their media policy objectives: pluralism, national production and broadcasting, promotion of national culture/languages, protection of minors, achievement of certain general interest services, etc.

3. In addition, in many cases, valuable revenue is derived from the fees levied for the benefit of the national regulatory authorities, which can make them more independent. In fact, a balance is often struck in licensing systems between financial requirements and programming/other requirements. (The more onerous the requirements, the lower the fee.)

To illustrate this, a note from the Independent Television Commission - the UK regulatory authority for commercial television - is enclosed (see annex). Much further information, including examples of licences, is available from its website (http://www.itc.org.uk).

***