Draft amendment to the Audiovisual Code: a new definition of disinformation and tougher sanctions

The draft law, which involves a series of amendments and additions to audiovisual legislation and has generated much debate and criticism in the public sphere, proposes, among other things, a new definition of disinformation, as agreed at European Union level, as well as higher fines for spreading disinformation.

The draft was prepared by the Working Group on Improving Media Legislation, which includes representatives of several non-governmental organisations in the field and members of the relevant parliamentary committee. The document was registered with Parliament on May 29. According to the explanatory note, the Media Services Code needs to be amended to bring audiovisual legislation into line with EU standards in the context of the European integration process. This mainly concerns the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, the European Act on Media Freedom and the Digital Services Act (DSA).

At the same time, the amendments are intended to respond to new challenges in the field, including: the ambiguous definition of certain terms; the growing influence of video-sharing platforms, which are not adequately regulated and can facilitate the dissemination of illegal or harmful content; the lack of strict transparency mechanisms regarding the ownership and financing of media service providers, and others.

DEFINITION OF DISINFORMATION

The authors of the draft law propose adjusting the definitions of several concepts such as “disinformation”, “hate speech” and “audiovisual commercial communication”.

Disinformation is currently defined in the Audiovisual Media Services Code as the intentional dissemination, by any means, in the public sphere, of information that is false or misleading and likely to harm national security.

However, the authors propose to extend the definition, in particular to highlight types of content that are not conducive to disinformation, such as satire or reporting of errors. The term would thus be defined as information that is false or misleading and can be verified, which is created, presented and disseminated to obtain economic gain or to deliberately mislead the public, and which may cause public harm. Public harm includes threats to democratic political processes and policy-making, as well as threats to public goods such as the protection of citizens’ health, the environment or security. Disinformation does not include error reporting, satire and parody, or partisan news and commentary clearly identified as such.

In fact, the definition of disinformation has already undergone a change in audiovisual legislation in 2023.

HIGHER PENALTIES

The draft also proposes higher fines for spreading disinformation – from 50,000 lei to 100,000 lei.  For repeated violations, fines could range from 100,000 lei to 200,000 lei, which is practically double those provided for under the legislation in force.

The authors generally want a system of proportionate penalties for violations of the law, with fines of up to 200,000 lei and the suspension of licences in the event of repeated offences. More specifically, it is proposed that, when determining the seriousness of the violation and its effects, the Audiovisual Council should take into account at least the following criteria: the classification, type and audience of the audiovisual media service.

The first debates on the proposals were held in Parliament on June 9, and several provisions of the draft law sparked discontent and criticism, including accusations of attempts at “censorship” by the ruling party. The main issues discussed were trusted notifiers, regulation of illegal content and video-sharing platforms, and the definition of disinformation. The chair of the Parliament’s Media Committee, Liliana Nicolaescu-Onofrei, suggested a ten-day deadline for all interested parties to submit their proposals.

Earlier, Media Azi explained the provisions of the draft law aimed at removing Teleradio-Moldova from parliamentary control and changing the mechanisms for appointing members of the BC and CSD, as well as those concerning video-sharing platforms.