Translated material
There are no barriers to them
Tomorrow a new channel will appear on the “sixth button”
Tomorrow “Media-socium” should start broadcasting on the sixth meter channel. General Director of Media Society Oleg Kiselev believes that nothing can prevent this. However, the Meshchansky Intermunicipal Court of Moscow, following a claim from a TV viewer, yesterday ordered the former broadcaster - the Moscow Independent Broadcasting Corporation - to resume broadcasting on the sixth meter frequency. The court decision states that currently MNVK has the right to participate in contractual relations and use its property without restrictions.As the chairman of the liquidation commission, Pavel Chernovalov, told the Vremya Novostey newspaper, the court ordered MNVK to eliminate within a month the violation of the rights of television viewers associated with the cessation of broadcasting of the TV-6 channel.
The Ministry of Press did not comment on the conflict.
For his part, Oleg Kiselev sees no reason that could prevent the company from going on air on June 1. In his opinion, court decisions will in no way affect Media Society: “I received this news with calm sympathy for MNVK, because I can hardly imagine how they will implement this court decision.”
According to Mr. Kiselyov, there were no legal obstacles to initially broadcasting under the name “TV-6,” but this option was abandoned for ethical reasons. “Well, MNVK, which considers itself the owner of this name, doesn’t like us to come out as TV-6. Why should we conflict about this? I don’t think that this is such a unique name that we should stick to it,” Mr. Kiselev told Interfax.
The head of the Center for Legal Protection of Intellectual Property, one of the authors of the law “On the Mass Media,” Vladimir Entin, also considers the implementation of court decisions problematic. He told a correspondent of the Vremya Novostei newspaper that when deciding on the constitutional right of television viewers to freely receive information, it is necessary to take into account the interests of not only one television viewer, but also the legally protected rights of other people who will be affected by such a decision. In other words, all citizens of Russia. “Each of them also has a constitutional right,” Mr. Entin says. “In order for the court to make a decision, in this case it was obliged to involve in the case those whose rights may be affected as a result of the decision in this case.”
In addition, according to the expert, the claim was brought against an improper defendant, since MNVK is not responsible for the implementation of the constitutional right of citizens to receive information. “This is when one person with zero authority to speak on behalf of all television viewers turns to the liquidation commission, which has no right to either exercise or interfere with the exercise of the constitutional right to information.”
Mr. Entin stated that the court's decision is, in principle, enforceable. However, the catch is that MNVK, after a decision has been made to liquidate it, has the right to only carry out actions related to the liquidation of the company. “The implementation of such a court decision forces MNVK to violate the law,” the expert emphasized.
In his opinion, the normal sequence of events was disrupted. First, it was necessary to cancel the MNVK license, and only then hold a competition, the winner of which would receive a license. “Here a situation of legal uncertainty arose and a gap was formed that led to similar court decisions,” explained Vladimir Entin.