Brussels, 03/02/2006 (Agence Europe) - During a meeting on 31 January with members of the European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee, European Commissioner Franco Frattini called for media libel to be excluded from Article 6 of the draft 2003 regulation on the law governing non-contractual obligations, known as the Rome II Regulation. He said the only way to break the deadlock was for libel in the media to be excluded from the scope of application of the future regulation. He acknowledged that none of the other suggestions allowed for a good balance to be struck between freedom of speech and protecting the honour and dignity of private individuals and therefore the wisest thing to do was to stick with the current system and not legislate on the issue. The European Commission's draft regulation initially suggested that in cases where the rights of an individual are violated by the media, the applicable law would be the law of the country where the alleged damage occurred or risked occurring, or the law of the court judging the case if the country where the alleged damage occurred counteracted the basic principles of the law of the place of action in terms of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. This approach was slammed by European reporters and editorial representatives as a measure that would expose them to court action. Some 13 different draft deals have been put on the table but Member States were unable to reach agreement. Countries like Sweden, Ireland and even Luxembourg want to preserve media interests and therefore want libel in the media to be excluded from the regulation pure and simple, while others like Germany, France, Italy and Slovenia want to defend the interests of victims. France and Belgium both back the position taken by the EP in July last year (see EUROPE 8987) whereby the applicable law would be the law of the country where the major areas of alleged damage occurred or risked occurring, in other words, the country where the publication or programme is targetted or, if it is not possible to determine which country (publications on the internet, for example, or international publications), then the applicable law would be that of the country where editorial control is exercised. This approach is described as more balanced by ENPA (the European Newspaper Publishers' Association). Austria does not seem to back the idea of excluding libel from the regulation and is in the process of drafting a new compromise based on the new options put forward by the Member States. On Monday or Tuesday of next week, the European Commission will adopt a new amended proposal which might be discussed by COREPER on 8 February.