Finally the Charter

It took many years, but finally the Fundamental Rights Charter will have a binding value for the Member States. In the Session of November 28-29 the European Parliament gave its support to the official proclamation of the document – approved in Nice in the year 2000 – so as to integrate the Lisbon Treaty as the new basis for the legal framework of the European Union.THE CHAMBER’S APPROVAL OF THE CHARTER. The works of the Assembly held in Brussels addressed many points: the directive on television programs and publicity, European parties financing rules, a series of regulations on the “inter-operability” of community railways, a resolution on “flexicurity” and weapon regulation. To this regard, rapporteur GISELA KALLENBACH voiced the need to fix “severe conditions” to the purchase and ownership of guns and pistols, to introduce a “strict marking regime” on weapons and their components along with a “data bank allowing to identify the owners” in order to contrast crime and terrorism. The MEPs then approved by large majority vote (534 in favour, 85 “no”, 21 abstensions) the EU Fundamental Rights Charter and gave president Hans-Gert Poettering mandate to “solemnly proclaim it before the Reform Treaty signature together with the European Council President and with the President of the Commission”. The report, drawn up by MEP Jo Leinen, included the date of the ceremony, fixed for December 12 in Strasbourg. The following day the treaty will be signed in Lisbon. Ratification procedure in the 27 Member States will occur in 2008 in order to enact the Treaty and the Charter on January 1, 2009. APPEAL TO POLAND AND THE UNITED KINGDOM. The text examined in the chamber underlined the “legally binding status of the Charter” which, as the speaker claimed during the debate, would make the Lisbon Treaty capable of preserving the “substance” of the European Constitution signed in 2004 and not yet ratified. With the approval of an amendment proposed by the Green Party, the Assembly “addressed an urgent appeal” to Poland and the United Kingdom (which with the opt-out clause had been granted a derogation to the Charter) “to be committed in reaching a consensus on the unlimited application of the Charter of Rights”. The hemicycle rejected (115 in favour, 513 against, 8 abstentions) an alternative solution presented by the “Euro-skeptical group” Independence and Democracy, which disapproved the binding trait of the text. TV, LIVE STREAMING, WEBCASTING. The Parliament also voted in favour of the new directive on television activities (former “No-frontiers television”) which updates and introduces regulations on advertising breaks, subliminal publicity, and tele-shopping. Definitive rules on the “advertising invasion” were to be fixed, but results appear modest and below the expectations of those who for a long time had been asking reduction of tv ads and programme marketing. The directive on “audiovisual media” intends to adjust the previous 1997 directive to iclude technological developments and changes in the advertising market. RUTH HIERONYMI , the rapporteur, explained that the text will be implemented “only at the end of 2009”. The directive also refers to analogical and digital television, live streaming, webcasting and “video on demand” services. SOME LIMIT TO PUBLICITY. According to this regulation, Member States “should guarantee the freedom of reception” on their territory of services coming from other Member States. Temporary authorization is granted if a program “evidently and seriously” violates the prohibition to broadcast programs that may “harm the moral, physical and psychological development of minors, in particular programs with pornographic or violent scenes” and programs “inciting hatred based on race, gender, religion or nationality”. The directive also regulates “audiovisual commercial communication”, a more articulated way of defining publicity and its new forms of implementation. It cannot exceed 12 minutes per broadcasted hour. It must be always “identifiable”, thus not subliminal. It cannot be harmful to the health (cigarettes and other tobacco-based products), it cannot “urge minors to purchase a product or a service by exploiting their lack of experience and exposure to persuasion”. A positive ban has been placed on “sponsoring” during information and children programs, and on documentaries and religious programs.