Committee Opinion | Doc. 14240 | 24 January 2017
Online media and journalism: challenges and accountability
Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
A. Conclusions of the committee
(open)B. Proposed amendments
(open)Amendment A (to the draft resolution)
After paragraph 2, insert the following paragraph:
“The Assembly wishes to emphasise in this context the public broadcasters’ special responsibility to adequately reflect the entire diversity of views present in society and recalls Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1 on public service media governance. Since public broadcasters are increasingly involved in the online media market, they could be instrumental in achieving the goals of the present resolution.”
Amendment B (to the draft resolution)
After paragraph 3, insert the following paragraph:
“As constantly stressed by the European Court of Human Rights in its case law, the press plays a vital role in a democratic society in imparting information on matters of public interest. It acts as a ‘public watchdog’, allowing members of the public to discover and form opinions about the attitudes and actions of political figures.”
Amendment C (to the draft resolution)
After paragraph 5, insert the following paragraph:
“The Assembly stresses the importance of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and especially of its Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Delfi AS v. Estonia (Application No. 64569/09). This landmark decision has clarified the duties and responsibilities of internet news portals when they provide, on a commercial basis, a platform for user-generated comments on previously published content.”
Amendment D (to the draft resolution)
After paragraph 7, insert the following paragraph:
“Referring to Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)7 of the Committee of Ministers on the protection of whistleblowers, and recalling its own Resolutions 1729 (2010) and 2060 (2015) on this subject, the Assembly reminds member States that they should have in place a normative, institutional and judicial framework to protect individuals who, in good faith, report or disclose information on threats or harm to the public interest. This is particularly relevant in the context of online media and journalism as the internet is one of the channels typically used by whistle-blowers to make wrongdoings public.”
Amendment E (to the draft resolution)
After paragraph 8.1.6, add the following paragraph:
“who have not yet done so, sign and ratify the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime (ETS No. 185) as well as its Additional Protocol concerning the criminalisation of acts of a racist and xenophobic nature committed through computer systems (ETS No. 189).”
Amendment F (to the draft resolution)
After paragraph 8.1.6, add the following paragraph:
“should co-operate with online media and internet service providers in order to set up codes of conduct which are inspired by the code of conduct countering illegal hate speech online agreed upon by the European Commission and major internet companies on 31 May 2016.”
Amendment G (to the draft resolution)
After paragraph 8.1.6, add the following paragraph:
“should develop clearer rules on liability of internet site owners for content posted by third parties, taking in particular into account the landmark judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Delfi AS v. Estonia.”
C. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Boriss Cilevičs, rapporteur for opinion
(open)1. Definitions
“‘service provider’ means:
i. any public or private entity that provides to users of its service the ability to communicate by means of a computer system, and
ii. any other entity that processes or stores computer data on behalf of such communication service or users of such service.”
2. The Strasbourg Court’s relevant case law






3. Amendments
3.1. Amendment A (to the draft resolution)
Explanatory note:
This amendment emphasises the importance and special responsibility of public media and its obligations in a democratic society while referring to Committee of Minister Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1 on public service media governance which states that “public service media play a specific role with regard to [the respect of the right to seek and receive information] and the provision of a varied and high-quality content, contributing to the reinforcement of democracy and social cohesion, and promoting intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding”.
3.2. Amendments B, C and G (to the draft resolution)
Explanatory note:
These amendments aim to recall the role of the press in a democratic society, as described by the European Court of Human Rights in its case law and by adding a specific reference to its Delfi AS v. Estonia landmark decision, whose relevance is described above.
3.3. Amendment D (to the draft resolution)
The amendment is self-explanatory.
3.4. Amendment E (to the draft resolution)
Explanatory note:
The Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime is the first international treaty on crimes committed via the internet and other computer networks, dealing particularly with infringements of copyright, computer-related fraud, child pornography and violations of network security. Its main objective, set out in the preamble, is “to pursue … a common criminal policy aimed at the protection of society against cybercrime, inter alia, by adopting appropriate legislation and fostering international co-operation”.
The scope of the Cybercrime Convention has been extended via its Additional Protocol concerning the criminalisation of acts of a racist and xenophobic nature committed through computer systems (ETS No. 189). As is pointed out in the Explanatory Report to the Additional Protocol, “[t]he emergence of international communication networks like the internet provide certain persons with modern and powerful means to support racism and xenophobia and enables them to disseminate easily and widely expressions containing such ideas”.
Both instruments are therefore relevant in this context, especially with regard to defining terms such as “service provider” or legally unacceptable content, and deserve to be mentioned in the resolution.
3.5. Amendment F (to the draft resolution)
Explanatory note
Code of conducts can become instrumental tools in preventing the spread of illegal hate speech, which is so easy and quick via the internet. The Code of conduct countering illegal hate speech online agreed upon by the European Commission and major internet companies on 31 May 2016 should serve as an inspiration.