Hungary’s government on Tuesday issued a list of rebuttals to international criticisms of the new media law, rejecting claims that the phrasing of key parts of the law were vague enough to be arbitrarily interpreted.
The government state secretary for communications said some of the law’s provisions had been criticised for containing so-called rubber terms.
Zoltan Kovacs said in an 11-page English-language document – an addendum to an English-language version of the law sent to foreign embassies in Budapest and the European Commission – that terms such as “human dignity” had been given clear definitions in legal practice.
“[The act] contains 72 definitions, several of which originate in the relevant EU directive. The categories usually referred to as “rubber terms” by critics (such as human dignity) have been given clear definitions during the legal practice of the last 20 years, and hundreds of decisions of various authorities, courts, and of the Constitutional Court concern these terms,” the document states.
The document cites a comprehensive list of criticisms and provides examples of similar provisions in the relevant laws of other EU member states.
Countering the charge that the Media Council is dominated by members delegated by the ruling parties, the NMHH noted that the Council is elected by Parliament.
“The Media Council is elected by the Parliament by way of a two-thirds majority vote [...] In performing their duties, members of the Media Council do not take orders from anyone; they cannot be recalled and they are independent in every respect,” the document said.
The document said that it was not true that the regulations would restrict political publicity or the formation of democratic public opinion and the government had no desire or the capacity to monitor opinions.
The state secretary also rejected criticism that most online content such as blogs come under the scope of the media law. The document says that the internet had been underregulated in Hungary and the new law addresses deficiencies in order to bring internet content regulation up to European standards.
The document said the law does not cover private websites or websites which have no intention of providing “mass information, or blogs”. The document cites examples of Austrian, Swedish, French and Swiss laws which include similar provisions to the Hungarian one.
Concerning the charge that regulation of television and radio is also applied to the printed and online press, the state secretary explained the necessity of rules and listed the limited areas governed by regulation.
“The convergence of media content distribution and the convergence of media platforms [...] corroborate the necessity to legislate. Content that is broadcast on television is immediately available on the channel’s website. Similarly, all printed outlets are available online. These fundamental rules should be enforced uniformly for all outlets, otherwise loopholes could easily emerge in the regulation,” the document stated.
Further, it denied that the printed or online press faced fines to the extent that they would be “silenced”.
The law required the press to proved “balanced” coverage.
“The three most important principles of imposing sanctions are progressivity, proportionality, and equal treatment.”
Accusations that the authorities would be free to access the protected secrets of the clients and perform searches and seizures of data carriers were also rejected in the state secretary’s rebuttal.
“In order to avoid criticism of media intervention and censorship, the proposed Media Act refers to the provisions of the Code on administrative procedures, which represent a set of basic rules and instruments applicable for all sectors and are in line with the principles of fair procedure applicable to the administrative procedure of the European Community.”
Parliament passed the legislation on media services and mass media as part of a new media package on December 21, with a two-thirds majority of the governing Fidesz-Christian Democratic alliance. It regulates the powers of the new media authority, the rights and responsibilities of players on the media market and terms of sanctions applicable for print, electronic and internet providers in breach of the law’s rules.
Most of the legislation’s provisions took effect on January 1.
