Brussels, 08/05/2008 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 6 May, the European Commission decided to send Belgium a reasoned opinion on the "must carry" obligations regime in force in the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital. These "must carry" obligations ensure that all network operators, such as cable distributors and telecommunications operators, guarantee the transmission of channels and audio and television broadcasting services as soon as a considerable number of consumers use these networks as the main mode of reception of radio or television programmes. Commenting on this decision, Viviane Reding, the European Commissioner with responsibility for telecommunications, said that "The Belgian authorities had a great opportunity to rectify the problems when they amended the Electronic Communications Act for the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital last year", she said. "We are therefore now following up on the matter, particularly in view of the fact that the European Court of Justice has recently declared that such rules must be proportionate and transparent", the Commission added.
Under the European "universal service" directive, which is part of the common EU set of rules on telecommunications, the Member States must establish reasonable "must carry" obligations, justified by legitimate public interests. This then makes it obligatory for network operators under their jurisdiction to transmit specified broadcast channels and services. These obligations must be: necessary to achieve clearly-defined objectives of general interest; -proportionate and transparent; - subject to periodic review.
The reasoned opinion which has just been sent to Belgium follows on from two letters of formal notice sent by the European Commission in July 2006 and June 2007. Although the law on electronic communications for the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital was modified in March 2007, it does not respond to the concerns of the Commission in terms of proportionality, transparency and non-discrimination. The Commission takes the view that the process for the allocation of channels to which the obligation will apply lacks transparency and clarity. Furthermore, it considers that the legislation should limit the number of channels to be allocated. At this moment in time, network operators and broadcasters are in a state of uncertainty as to their rights and obligations under this regime. (O.L.)