CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE DE MEYER

(Translation)

The reasons which led me to hold that there had been a breach of the right to freedom of expression in the case of Groppera Radio AG and Others [1] could not but prompt me to reach the same decision in the instant case, especially as what was in issue here was measures preventing public demonstration of equipment for receiving television broadcasts.

In this connection I think it useful to say that the licensing power of States in respect of radio and television does not extend to the reception of broadcasts [2] and that, for the rest, such reception can only be interfered with by States as regards methods or circumstances and only to the extent that one or other of those is giving rise to harmful effects which there is a pressing social need to prevent or eliminate [3] . The freedom to see and watch and to hear and listen is not, as such, subject to States ’ authority.

[*]  Note by the registry: The case is numbered 15/1989/175/231.  The first number is the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the relevant year (second number).  The last two numbers indicate the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications to the Commission.

[*]   Note by the registry: The amendments to the Rules of Court which   entered into force on 1 April 1989 are applicable to this case.

[*]  Note by the Registrar: Case no. 14/1988/158/214.

[*]  Note by the Registrar.  For practical reasons this annex will appear only with the printed version of the judgment (volume 178 of Series A of the Publications of the Court), but a copy of the Commission's report is obtainable from the registry.

[1] Series A no. 173, pp. 39-41.

[2] See § 61 of the Commission's report.

[3] Such as the disturbances mentioned in §§ 79 and 82 of the Commission's report.