Abstract
Since the mid-1990s, it has become increasingly clear that legislation, used to protect minors against harmful content in traditional media, is not suitable to regulate the drastically transformed digital media landscape in an efficient manner. In response to this situation, alternative regulatory instruments (ARIs), such as self- and co-regulation, have been incorporated in regulatory strategies to protect minors against harmful digital content. Notwithstanding the common misconception that ARIs function within a legal vacuum, the use of such instruments should comply with the broader legal framework, and more importantly, must respect a number of fundamental rights, such as the rights to freedom of expression, privacy, a fair trial and an effective remedy. This article focuses on the right to freedom of expression and aims to assess with which freedom of expression safeguards the ARIs must comply in order to guarantee the protection that this right entails. To achieve this, the article examines, on the one hand, the applicability of Article 10 ECHR with respect to ARIs, and, on the other hand, the fundamental rights issues that may arise both with respect to the involvement of private actors and the incorporation of technological tools in ARIs.