Minority-Language Related Broadcasting and Legislation in the OSCE
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Other Publications from the Center for Global Center for Global Communication Studies Communication Studies (CGCS) 4-2003 Minority-Language Related Broadcasting and Legislation in the OSCE Tarlach McGonagle Bethany Davis Noll Monroe Price University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications Part of the Critical and Cultural Studies Commons Recommended Citation McGonagle, Tarlach; Davis Noll, Bethany; and Price, Monroe. (2003). Minority-Language Related Broadcasting and Legislation in the OSCE. Other Publications from the Center for Global Communication Studies. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications/3 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications/3 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Minority-Language Related Broadcasting and Legislation in the OSCE Abstract There are a large number of language-related regulations (both prescriptive and proscriptive) that affect the shape of the broadcasting media and therefore have an impact on the life of persons belonging to minorities. Of course, language has been and remains an important instrument in State-building and maintenance. In this context, requirements have also been put in place to accommodate national minorities. In some settings, there is legislation to assure availability of programming in minority languages.1 Language rules have also been manipulated for restrictive, sometimes punitive ends. A language can become or be made a focus of loyalty for a minority community that thinks itself suppressed, persecuted, or subjected to discrimination. Regulations relating to broadcasting may make language a target for attack or suppression if the authorities associate it with what they consider a disaffected or secessionist group or even just a culturally inferior one. In light of such concerns, a crosscountry study was necessary to establish and analyse the existing practice of language regulations used by States to advance or restrict certain groups, as well as for the identification and possible development of best practices in language regulation in the broadcast media. This study reports on the basic regulations of minority-language related broadcasting of the 55 participating States of the OSCE. Specifically, the study surveys State practice with regard to: (1) whether there are any stipulated quotas on the use of language as a vehicle of broadcasting (both for publicly- and privately-owned and run broadcasters); and (2) whether there is any accommodation (such as, specifically allotted time, bands, financial support) for minority-language broadcasting. The OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (HCNM) commissioned this study because of his realisation that a) a key marker of identity is language and b) how States affect or regulate the use of language or languages has significant implications for the exercise of rights. States, through regulation, can strengthen or weaken languages and thereby, at times, strengthen or weaken the position of national minorities. In the information age, a major theatre where this takes place is in the structure of media in various societies and that is the focus of this study. Thus, the present exercise seeks to identify broad trends and indicate the different approaches for each of these. Disciplines Communication | Critical and Cultural Studies Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License. This report is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications/3 MINORITY-LANGUAGE RELATED BROADCASTING AND LEGISLATION IN THE OSCE Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy (PCMLP), Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, Wolfson College, Oxford University & Institute for Information Law (IViR), Universiteit van Amsterdam Study commissioned by the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities April 2003 Edited by: Tarlach McGonagle (IViR) Bethany Davis Noll (PCMLP) Monroe Price (PCMLP) Table of contents Acknowledgements.....................................................................................................................i Overview....................................................................................................................................1 Suggested further reading ........................................................................................................32 Summary of international and national provisions ..................................................................35 Albania.....................................................................................................................................56 Andorra ....................................................................................................................................62 Armenia....................................................................................................................................66 Austria......................................................................................................................................71 Azerbaijan................................................................................................................................84 Belarus .....................................................................................................................................90 Belgium....................................................................................................................................95 Bosnia and Herzegovina ........................................................................................................120 Bulgaria..................................................................................................................................129 Canada....................................................................................................................................136 Croatia....................................................................................................................................149 Cyprus....................................................................................................................................160 Czech Republic ......................................................................................................................168 Denmark.................................................................................................................................176 Estonia....................................................................................................................................184 Finland ...................................................................................................................................192 France.....................................................................................................................................204 Georgia...................................................................................................................................212 Germany.................................................................................................................................217 Greece ....................................................................................................................................230 The Holy See..........................................................................................................................235 Hungary..................................................................................................................................238 Iceland....................................................................................................................................247 Ireland ....................................................................................................................................251 Italy ........................................................................................................................................266 Kazakhstan.............................................................................................................................273 Kyrgyzstan .............................................................................................................................281 Latvia .....................................................................................................................................288 Liechtenstein..........................................................................................................................296 Lithuania ................................................................................................................................301 Luxembourg...........................................................................................................................308 The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia......................................................................313 Malta ......................................................................................................................................320 Moldova .................................................................................................................................324 Monaco ..................................................................................................................................329