Approximation of National Laws on the Allocation of Radio Frequencies for Broadcasting and Mobile Telecommunications Services in the EU

Abstract

The question addressed is whether the EC has competence under Article 95 EC Treaty¹ (EC) on the approximation of laws to allocate the frequencies to be released by the switchover from analogue to digital at the European level, or if the exercise of this legislative power is reserved to the Member States in an exclusive competence on the financing of public broadcasting. Due to the length and scope of this paper, the topic will be treated with a specific focus on the European telecommunications market.

Methodologically, the EC competence in question will be studied under the criteria developed by the European Court of Justice (EC]) case law through case Germany v European Parliament and Council (Case 376/98) [2002], hereafter the “Tobacco Advertising Case”. This choice is based on two different sets of reasons: On the one hand, this ruling clarifies the scope of a domaine réservé of Member States under EC Law through the example of health policy and balances it with the requirements of the internal market, and on the other hand, it sets the strictest prerequisites for an EC harmonization competence to be exercised within the aforesaid scope. Therefore, if said conditions are met, there can be no doubt that Article 95 EC is applicable to the case at hand. Within this context, we shall argue that the EC has competence under Article 95 EC to allocate the frequencies to be released, since: First, there is a future likely disparity in national laws.

Second, such disparity will create obstacles to the exercise of the free movement of services and goods, as well as of the freedom of establishment. Moreover, it will result in appreciable distortions of competition.

Third, a harmonization measure will actually contribute to improve the functioning of the internal market and it would not interfere with the guarantee of existence and development of public broadcasting nor with the subsidiarity principle, provided that they applied.

Keywords

digital dividend public broadcasting telecommunications mobile communications domaine réservé harmonization Article 95 EC

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Craig

P.P.

and De Búrca

(2007) EU law: Text, cases, and materials. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

European Commission (2005) Accelerating the transition from analogue to digital broadcasting, COM (2005) 204.

European Commission (2007) Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: “Reaping the full benefits of the digital dividend in Europe: A common approach to the use of the spectrum released by the digital switchover, COM (2007) 700.

European Commission (2006) Request for Expert Opinion “EU Spectrum Policy Implications of the Digital Dividend”. Directorate-General Information Society, Communication Services, Policy and Regulatory Framework, Radio Spectrum Policy. Brussels, Belgium.

European Parliament (2007) Study on Roaming: “An Assessment of the Commission Proposal on Roaming” (IP/A/ALL/FWC/2006-105/Lot4/SC1). Policy Department, Economic and Scientific Policy. Brussels, Belgium, 2007.

Hervey

(2001) “Community and National Competence in Health after Tobacco Advertising”, Common Market Law Review, 38:1, 1421–1446.

Koenig

Bartosch

Braun

J.-D.

(2002) EC Competition and Telecommunications Law. International Competition Law Series, Vol. 6. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

Koenig

Haratsch

(2006) Europarecht. 5th Ed., Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Koenig

Neumann

, (2006) “Rechtsgutachten zu den gemeinschaftsrechtlichen Schranken einer Harmonisierung der Endnutzerentgelte für das Auslandsroaming durch die Europäische Gemeinschaft”. Bonn, Germany, 6 February 2006.

10.

Radio Spectrum Policy Group (2006) Expert Opinion “EU Spectrum Policy Implications of the Digital Dividend”. Brussels, Belgium.

11.

SCF Associates LTD (2006) “Benchmarking Impacts of EU Policy: Options for Economically Efficient Management of Radio Spectrum”. Final Report. Princes Risborough, Buckinghamshire, UK.

12.

SCF Associates LTD (2007) “The Mobile Provide: Economic Impacts of Alternative Uses of the Digital Dividend”. Summary Report, Princes Risborough, Buckinghamshire, UK.

13.

Turner

(2000) “Advocate General's Opinion on the legality of the Tobacco Advertising Directive”, Business Law Review, 21:10, 223–228.