CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG — 18 février 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sE6823C01 { margin-top:34pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s780F5245 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; clear:both } .s795B4A6B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; padding-top:1pt; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; font-size:11pt } .sEC28DD31 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt } .sF9E8C072 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; padding-bottom:1pt; font-size:10pt } .s6477A72F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2D726B78 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s598389FA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:13pt } .sF5E1C6CF { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; color:#ff0000 } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .sE208486F { font-family:Arial; color:#ff0000 } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s28F0D84C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s8B983D37 { text-transform:none } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s5C5C410E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sB9F7F539 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sD0489F03 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s67CAFE05 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.45pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7C22C014 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:16.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s743F3A55 { margin-right:0pt; margin-left:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s879C130D { margin-left:7.05pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-weight:bold; text-transform:none } .s5E8F5A28 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sCBF2D345 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:8.18pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sCD7D0356 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:4.85pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2044A09A { margin-left:6.51pt; margin-bottom:6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.99pt; font-weight:normal; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC36A6361 { font-family:Arial; color:#000000 } .sAE6FB95D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:32.01pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF54F3725 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:42.55pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sDBC81028 { width:4.83pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s65DDED6B { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:42.55pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s7AE800C3 { width:4.28pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sC47DA4E2 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.51pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s448F0C15 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s7F175FE6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:51.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17.05pt; text-align:justify } .sE5C1F6E3 { width:3.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC2E086EB { width:36.89pt; display:inline-block } .s829C9466 { width:149.43pt; display:inline-block } .s5A65B3DC { width:46.56pt; display:inline-block } .s44B8752F { width:177.11pt; display:inline-block } .sD00444C6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt } .s431635B7 { width:98.1%; border-collapse:collapse } .sAC3193B5 { width:7.9%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .s8705A5E4 { width:29.08%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s17D6E4E4 { width:27.78%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s3BB5D8A0 { width:18.9%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s31B9CD5B { width:16.32%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s564565A { width:7.9%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s761BBA0A { width:29.08%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sCDCE9555 { width:27.78%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC48E9E79 { width:18.9%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7B4075EE { width:16.32%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } THIRD SECTION CASE OF OBJECTIVE TELEVISION AND RADIO BROADCASTING COMPANY AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN (Application no. 257/12)   JUDGMENT   Art 10 • Freedom to impart information and ideas • Refusal by the National Television and Radio Council (NTRC) to grant the applicants a radio broadcasting licence following a call for tenders • Relevant domestic law, including selection criteria, sufficiently accessible and precise • Failure to provide a duly reasoned decision and to carry out a comprehensive and objective evaluation • NTRC exercised, in the licensing procedure at issue, very wide and virtually unlimited discretionary powers • Absence of adequate protection against arbitrary interferences by a public authority with freedom of expression • Apparent conflict of interest of one of the NTRC’s members never adequately disclosed, seriously undermining the NTRC’s impartiality and rendering arbitrary the entire licensing procedure • Interference not “prescribed by law”   Prepared by the Registry. Does not bind the Court.   STRASBOURG 18 February 2025   FINAL   18/05/2025   This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.   In the case of Objective Television and Radio Broadcasting Company and Others v. Azerbaijan, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:   Ioannis Ktistakis , President ,   Peeter Roosma,   Lətif Hüseynov,   Darian Pavli,   Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir,   Diana Kovatcheva,   Mateja Đurović , judges , and Milan Blaško, Section Registrar, Having regard to: the application (no.   257/12) against the Republic of Azerbaijan lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a limited liability company, Objective Television and Radio Broadcasting Company ( Obyektiv Televiziya və Radio Yayım Şirkəti – “the applicant company”), and three Azerbaijani nationals, Mr Mehman Yadulla oglu Aliyev ( Mehman Yadulla oğlu Əliyev – “the second applicant”), Mr Emin Rafik oglu Huseynov ( Emin Rafik   oğlu Hüseynov – “the third applicant”) and Mr   Rasul Agahasan oglu Jafarov ( Rəsul Ağahəsən oğlu Cəfərov – “the fourth applicant”) (collectively, “the applicants”), on 25 November 2011; the decision to give notice of the application to the Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”); the parties’ observations; Having deliberated in private on 28 January 2025, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: INTRODUCTION 1.     The application, raising issues under Article 10 of the Convention, concerns the refusal to grant to the applicants a radio broadcasting licence. THE FACTS 2.     The personal details of the applicants are set out in the appended table. The second and third applicants were journalists and founders of the applicant company, which was registered in 2010. At the material time, the second applicant was also the owner and director of the Turan Information Agency, as well as the founder and editor of Internet media resources contact.az and top.az, and the third applicant was the chairman of an NGO, the Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety (“IRFS”). The fourth applicant was a civil society activist. The applicants were represented by Mr R.   Hajili, a lawyer based in Strasbourg. 3.     The Government were represented by their Agent, Mr Ç.   Əsgərov. 4.     The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. CALL FOR TENDERS FOR THE 103.3 FM RADIO FREQUENCY 5 .     On 23 November 2010 the National Television and Radio Council (“the   NTRC”) decided to announce a call for tenders for a broadcasting licence for the 103.3 FM radio frequency. The announcement mentioned a list of required documents to be submitted by bidders. It did not indicate any preferences for the types of programmes to be broadcast on the radio station, stating only that the broadcasting zone would cover the city of Baku and the Absheron peninsula. 6.     A total of three bids were submitted. The applicant company submitted a bid for a radio station named Objective Radio ( Obyektiv Radio ). It noted that its programming would consist of daily news programmes (20% of broadcasting time), analytical programmes (10%), culture news (10%), concerts and other arts programmes (15%), educational programmes (20%), music programmes and talk shows (15%) and sports news (5%). It also submitted the names of five staff members to be employed by the station – including the second applicant as chief editor and the third applicant as producer. 7.     The fourth applicant, in an individual capacity, submitted a bid to operate a radio station named Alternative Radio ( Alternativ Radio ), which would broadcast news programmes (25%), talk shows (15%), culture news (5%), sports news (5%), educational and intellectual programmes (20%) and music programmes (25%). It would employ eight persons. 8.     The final bid was submitted by a company named Golden Prince LLC for a radio station named Free News Radio (“ Azad Xəbər” radiosu – later changed to Araz FM Radio), whose proposed broadcasting content would mainly consist of news programmes (90% of the total broadcasting time), which would be further subdivided into segments on various types of news – including political news (50%), cultural news (20%), educational news (12%), scientific news (5%) and sports news (3%), with the remaining 10% of the broadcasting time dedicated to other programming, such as music and advertisements. It would have twelve staff members. 9.     All bidders also submitted information on the relevant equipment that they owned and would use for broadcasting. THE NTRC MEETING 10 .     On 18 January 2011 the NTRC held a meeting to determine the winner of the call for tenders. The meeting was held in two parts: an open meeting with the participation of the bidders, followed by a closed meeting of the NTRC members only. All three bidders were invited to participate and were given an opportunity to make very brief presentations of their respective proposals and respond to questions by the NTRC members, of whom seven were present. The proceedings, as reflected in the minutes of the meeting, can be summarised as follows. 11 .     In the open meeting, the second and third applicants, who spoke on behalf of the applicant company, said that the field of television and radio broadcasting currently suffered from a lack of sufficient “objectivity” and pluralism of opinions, that for that reason many radio stations preferred focusing on entertainment programmes, that available social and political news programmes were politically one-sided, and that Objective Radio aimed at introducing innovation in respect of social and political programming. The second and third applicants were asked by the NTRC members when they planned to begin broadcasting if awarded the licence and how they would manage to produce the proposed volume of programmes, given that there would only be five staff members. In response, the second and third applicants noted that they would start broadcasting within six months of the licence being awarded (the maximum period set by the relevant legislation) and that, if awarded the licence, they would hire more employees – in particular by inviting to join their staff some of the current staff of the Turan Information Agency which was owned and headed by the second applicant at that time. 12.     The fourth applicant said, among other things, that the submitted list of staff members in respect of his station was not complete (owing to the short time frame for submission of documents for the competition), but that there would be more staff and that negotiations with potential new employees were underway. Responding to a question from an NTRC member, he further noted that, if awarded the licence, his radio station could begin broadcasting in less than six months. 13 .     The representatives of Golden Prince LLC said that their company had procured “very high-quality” equipment for their radio station. It was aiming for a high standard of radio broadcasting that would be on a par with the best broadcasting companies in the world. Their radio station would be almost exclusively dedicated to broadcasting news, with very few music and entertainment programmes. They also noted that their company could begin broadcasting within three months, if awarded the licence. 14 .     Having heard the bidders, the NTRC proceeded to deliberate in a closed meeting. 15 .     The NTRC chairman, N.M., asked the other members if they wished to discuss each bid separately or all bids together. It was then decided that they would discuss all bids together. Five NTRC members then took the floor: -     G.J. said that Objective Radio (the applicant company’s bid) had only five employees (including only one reporter), and that it was unclear how it could achieve the proposed production volumes. He further noted that he was “satisfied” with the presentation made by the representatives of Golden Prince LLC, because they were more prepared than the other bidders and could begin broadcasting sooner. For those reasons, he was in favour of awarding the licence to Golden Prince LLC; -     A.A. said that he concurred with G.J. and that Golden Prince LLC merited being awarded the licence because it possessed better creative and technical capabilities; -     A.K. said that Golden Prince LLC had better and more modern equipment than the other bidders and that, whereas the already existing radio stations were all very similar in their broadcasting content, this bidder could bring something different to radio in Azerbaijan; and that for those reasons it merited being awarded the licence more than the other two bidders; -     M.E. said that he concurred with his colleagues and that he favoured Golden Prince LLC’s bid because of its broadcasting concept, better and more modern equipment, and its staffing potential ( kadr potensialı ); -     S.V. said that she considered that two conditions had to be met by a bidder in order to have a chance of securing the licence: namely, a high technical capability and a high staffing potential; Golden Prince LLC was ahead of the other bidders in terms of both of these conditions. 16 .     The chairman then put the matter to a vote and Golden Prince LLC was selected as the winning bidder by a unanimous vote. ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE RESULTS AND THE APPLICANTS’ CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE NTRC 17.     Immediately after the closed meeting, the bidders were orally informed of this decision. They were not provided with a copy of the decision or the minutes of the meeting at this time. 18.     On 21 January 2011 the applicant company requested a copy of the NTRC’s formal decision. 19 .     By a letter of 31 January 2011, the NTRC informed the applicant company and the fourth applicant of the results of the call for tenders. In particular, it noted that, being guided by the requirements of Article 15.5. of the Law on Television and Radio Broadcasting of 25 June 2002 (“the   Broadcasting Law”) and in view of the fact that “a purely news radio station would be a novelty for the television and radio space” ( “sırf   xəbər radiosunun teleradio məkanı üçün yenilik olacağını nəzərə alaraq” ), it had selected Golden Prince LLC as the winner and awarded it the new broadcasting licence. Enclosed with the NTRC’s letter was an extract from the minutes of its meeting of 18 January 2011 containing only the operative part concerning its decision on the result of the selection, which stated as follows: “ EXTRACT from the minutes of meeting no. 1 of the National Television and Radio Council of 18 January 2011 Decision: 1.     Golden Prince LLC shall be declared as the winner of the call for tenders for the 103.3 FM radio frequency announced by the decision of the National Television and Radio Council of 23 November 2010. 2.     Golden Prince LLC shall be issued a special permit (licence) for radio broadcasting for a period of six years.” 20 .     On 2 February 2011 the applicant company lodged a request to be provided with a full copy of the minutes of the meeting of 18 January 2011. By a letter of 9 February 2011 the NTRC refused that request, noting that it was not “expedient” ( məqsədəmüvafiq ) to provide a copy of the minutes because they were intended for internal use and also taking into account “the interests of other legal persons”. 21 .     On 4 February 2011 the applicant company wrote to the NTRC that, from the information provided to it by the NTRC to date, it was not clear what the reasons had been for selecting Golden Prince LLC as the winner. It requested a copy of Golden Prince LLC’s bid and the documents enclosed therewith (those documents were required, by law, to include a copy of Golden Prince LLC’s State registration document – in this case, a charter), and a copy of documents authorising the persons who had participated at the NTRC meeting of 18 January 2011 on behalf of Golden Prince LLC to represent that company at the meeting. On 15 February 2011 the NTRC responded by letter, informing the applicant company of the names of the two representatives of Golden Prince LLC who had attended the meeting of 18   January 2011, but noting that – taking into account “the interests of other legal persons” – it was not “expedient” to provide copies of the requested documents. COURT PROCEEDINGS 22.     On 2 March 2011 the second and third applicants, in their capacity as the founders of the applicant company, lodged an appeal against the NTRC’s decision with the Baku Court of Appeal, requesting the court to annul the results of the call for tenders and to order the NTRC to announce a new one. The fourth applicant also appealed separately. 23.     The applicants argued, inter alia , that the NTRC’s decision had not complied with the requirements of Article 32 of the Broadcasting Law; nor had it complied with Article 4.7 of the Rules for a competition for a special permit (licence) in the field of television and radio broadcasting, which had been issued by the NTRC (“the Licensing Rules”). In particular, the assessment of the bids had not been carried out in accordance with the criteria established in those legal provisions – including the requirement of Article   32.0.1 of the Broadcasting Law that priority be given to educational and cultural programmes and that overloading the air with the same types of programmes should be prevented. The NTRC’s stated preference for a station broadcasting mainly news programmes in selecting the winner had not been announced in advance, was contrary to the above-mentioned criteria and was arbitrary. 24.     Moreover, they submitted that, contrary to the requirements of Article   18.5 of the Broadcasting Law, the NTRC had not sent them a copy of its decision refusing to award the licence in the form required by law (made in writing and containing the reasons for that refusal) within fifteen days of the announcement of the results of the call for tenders, but had instead sent it to them in the form of an extract from the minutes of the meeting of 18   January 2011; that extract did not specify any reasons for the decision. 25 .     Furthermore, the applicants argued that the NTRC’s past decisions had fostered the creation of “monopolistic” conditions in the broadcasting sector, as it had previously awarded licences for new television stations to a single entity – the State-controlled Azerbaijan Television and Radio Broadcasting Closed Joint-Stock Company – under (in the applicants’ view) legally questionable circumstances. 26.     It appears that at an unspecified time in the course of the judicial proceedings the applicants were provided with full copies of the minutes of the NTRC meeting of 18 January 2011 (summarised in paragraphs 10-16 above). It also appears that they were provided with Golden Prince LLC’s charter and the documents submitted by it with its bid. 27 .     By a judgment of 28 March 2011 the Baku Court of Appeal dismissed the applicants’ appeals after examining them together, finding that the NTRC’s decision was lawful. It noted that, under Article 18.4.1 of the Broadcasting Law, not being chosen as the winner of a call for tenders constituted grounds for refusal to grant a licence and that the NTRC had informed the applicants of that fact in its above-mentioned letter of 31   January 2011, within thirteen days of its decision. That letter had further specified that Golden Prince LLC had been selected as the winner, in compliance with Article 15.5 of that Law and taking into account the consideration that a proposed purely news-based radio station would constitute a “novelty” within the Azerbaijani television and radio sphere. Moreover, as to the applicants’ arguments that the assessment had not been carried out in a manner complying with the criteria set out in the relevant legislation, the court noted that although Golden Prince LLC’s programming would be mainly news, 32% of its broadcasting time would be dedicated to educational and cultural news – which was in compliance with Article 32.0.1 of the Broadcasting Law. The court also referred to the minutes of the NTRC meeting of 18 January 2011, noting that various criteria set out in the relevant legislation – such as the originality of a proposed broadcasting concept, the creative staff’s potential and experience, and the technical and financial capabilities – had been discussed and considered by the NTRC members. 28 .     The second and third applicants – as well as the fourth applicant separately – lodged a further appeal with the Supreme Court, reiterating their arguments. They also disagreed with the appellate court’s assessment of the compliance of Golden Prince LLC’s proposed programming with Article   32.0.1 of the Broadcasting Law, noting that it had been proposed that 90% of its broadcasting would be expressly dedicated to news – including the 32% of the “cultural and educational news” (which the applicants also considered to constitute “news programmes”). As to Golden Prince’s staff potential and experience, the second and third applicants highlighted their own respective experience in the media field and noted that it was not clear why the NTRC gave preference to Golden Prince LLC’s staff, (which, although numerically superior, included such non-creative-staff members as a driver, a technician, a treasurer, a chief accountant and a director). Lastly, the second and third applicants argued that the general trend in the country was that the NTRC did not allow access by well-known independent media to television and radio broadcasting, instead favouring such “new” companies as Golden Prince LLC that were unknown and had no prior media experience. 29.     By a final decision of 25 May 2011 (sent to the applicants on 31 May 2011), the Supreme Court dismissed the applicants’ appeals, upholding the appellate court’s reasoning. OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES AND DEVELOPMENTS RELEVANT TO THE CASE 30 .     The applicants submitted to the Court (see also paragraphs 64-65 below) that, at the time of the above-mentioned procedures relating to the call for tenders, “no one knew who [had] founded Golden Prince, who its owners were, who had effective control of the company, or who financed its operations”. However, subsequently (after the applicants obtained a copy of Golden Prince LLC’s charter) it was revealed that its formal owner was A.V., who had been previously associated with other businesses that “were believed to be owned by family members” of A.H., the head of the Department of Public Policy Issues ( İctimai-siyasi məsələlər şöbəsi ) of the President’s Office ( Azərbaycan Respublikası Prezidentinin Administrasiyası ). 31.     According to publicly available information, A.H. was the head of the Department of Public Policy Issues of the President’s Office (and of that department’s predecessor) from the mid-1990s until November 2019. A.H.’s wife, S.V. (see paragraph 15 above), was appointed as a member of the NTRC in 2007. Between 2011 and 2018 she was the deputy chairman of the NTRC. 32 .     On 24 June 2014, after the present application had been lodged, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) published the results of an investigation carried out by journalists under the title “Azerbaijan: Media and Regulators a Family Affair”. The report stated, among other things, that S.V. managed a newspaper ( Kaspi ), was a member of the NTRC, and owned and managed several companies dealing with education and university-preparation courses. She also “happen[ed] to be the wife of [A.H.] ..., who [was] one of the key figures defining the government’s policies regarding media, freedom of speech and political liberties”. It was stated that S.V. and her family “benefited from regulating many of the businesses they own[ed]”, which created a number of conflicts of interest. 33.     Furthermore, the OCCRP report stated that A.H. and S.V.’s son, S.H., was also involved in a number of businesses – including as a director of a radio station named in the article as both “Araz Radio” and “Araz FM”. Araz   FM was linked to A.H.’s family and in 2011 had been awarded a licence for the 103.3 FM frequency (previously used for broadcasting by the BBC’s Azerbaijani service, whose licence had been revoked in 2009). In particular, Araz FM was owned by a company named Araz Teleradio, which had in turn been incorporated by Golden Prince LLC and an individual named E.K. Golden Prince LLC itself had been incorporated in 2008 by an Iranian citizen (S.G.) and an Azerbaijani citizen (A.V., who was reportedly a relative of S.V. and her business partner in respect of several entities). Araz Teleradio was registered at the same address as all the other companies with links to A.H.’s family. At the opening ceremony for one of Araz FM’s studios, S.H. had been introduced as the general director of the radio station and had cut the ribbons. The report went on to describe A.H.’s family’s links with a number of other companies. 34 .     Media reports about the investigation were also published by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and other news outlets. 35.     On 27 June 2014 BBC News’ Azerbaijani service published an article entitled “[A.H.]: ‘I am proud of the companies reportedly owned by my family’” ( “[Ə.H.]: ‘Ailəmin malik olduğu adı çəkilən şirkətlərlə fəxr edirəm’” ). As reported by the BBC, A.H. confirmed that the companies in question – including Golden Prince LLC – belonged to his family and stated that those companies had been created through his family’s hard work, that his wife and his son had created them and were involved in their functioning, and that there was nothing that he had to be ashamed of in this respect. 36 .     According to publicly available information, N.M. (who was the NTRC chairman from 2003 to 2020) had previously worked at the Department of Public Policy Issues of the President’s Office during the period between 1996 and 2003. 37.     In 2022, following legislative amendments, the NTRC was abolished and replaced by the Audiovisual Council as its successor. RELEVANT LEGAL FRAMEWORK RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW 38 .     The relevant extracts of the Broadcasting Law, as in force at the material time, provided as follows: “ Article 14.     Special permit (licence) for broadcasting 14.1.     Television and radio broadcasting within the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan is carried out on the basis of a special permit (licence) issued in accordance with this Law. ... Article 15.     Competition for a special permit (licence) 15.1.     A special permit (licence) for broadcasting is granted on the basis of a competition, with the exception of State and public television and radio broadcasting. 15.2.     The rules and terms of the competition are published in the official press at least one month before the expiry of the period for the submission of applications to participate in the competition. 15.3.     When defining the terms of the competition for a special permit (licence), the interests of viewers, listeners and the State shall be taken into account. ... 15.5.     When conducting a competition for a special permit (licence), the following are taken into account: 15.5.1.     compliance of the applicant’s parameters with the terms of the competition; 15.5.2.     the applicant’s creative and technical capacity to carry out television and radio broadcasting; 15.5.3.     the results of open hearings and other competition procedures. ... Article 18.     Refusal to accept documents and to grant a special permit (licence) 18.4.     A bidder whose documents have been accepted for the [purposes of the] competition shall be refused a special permit (licence) only in the following cases: 18.4.1.     if it was not chosen as the winner according to the results of the competition; ... ... 18.5.     A decision to refuse to grant a special permit (licence) shall be submitted within fifteen days of the day of the announcement of the results of the competition. A decision to refuse to grant a special permit (licence) is sent to the bidder in writing, [setting out] the reasons for the refusal. An appeal may be made administratively and (or) to a court within one month from the date of delivery of this decision. ... Article 32.     Requirements in respect of programming 32.0.     When preparing programmes for broadcasting, the following requirements must be met: 32.0.1.     priority should be given to educational and cultural issues – overloading the air with commercial [or] informational [programmes] or other programmes of the same type should be prevented by way of balancing the programming; 32.0.2.     everyone should be afforded conditions [in which] to freely express their opinions and views, provided that: 32.0.2.1.     the principles of impartiality, unbiasedness, comprehensiveness, completeness and truthfulness of information are respected; 32.0.2.2.     the programme developers are directly responsible before the law; 32.0.3.     denigrating the honour and dignity of people and tarnishing their business reputation should not be allowed – the rights and freedoms of individuals, as determined by the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan, should be respected; 32.0.4.     facts and events should be interpreted fairly – one-sidedness should not be allowed; 32.0.5.     terrorism, violence, cruelty, and ethnic, religious and racial discrimination should not be promoted; 32.0.6.     the use of the State language in programmes (broadcasts) should be ensured; 32.0.7.     State technical standards in the field of television and radio broadcasting must be followed; 32.0.8.     social broadcasts of an educational and informational nature should be organised for the deaf and hard of hearing; 32.0.9.     the protection of national and moral values should be ensured consistently; ...” 39 .     The relevant extracts from Rules for a competition for a special permit (licence) in the field of television and radio broadcasting, adopted by the NTRC (“the Licensing Rules”) – as in force at the material time – provided as follows: “2.1.     The [NTRC] has the right: 2.1.1.     to hold a competition for a licence; 2.1.2.     to grant licences to competition winners; 2.1.3.     to prolong the term of a licence; 2.1.4.     to refuse to grant a licence; ... ... 4.7.     The [NTRC] shall evaluate [bids] according to the following criteria in determining the winners of a licence competition: -   the originality of the broadcasting concept and its ability to ensure the development of local television and radio broadcasting; -   the quality of documents submitted for the competition ...; -   the quantity, volume (in percentage terms) and diversity of cultural and educational programmes [aired] on the broadcasting network; -   the preference (in percentage terms) given to local television and radio broadcasting productions in the general [field of] broadcasting; -   the coverage [given] to local events and the lifestyle of the population living in the area covered by the [broadcast network]; -   the preference [given] to the use of the State language and to broadcasting programmes in the State language, in strict observance of the requirements in respect of its use; -   strict observance of the principles of freedom of speech and pluralism; -   advocacy for universal values such as mercy, humanism, honour, conscience, friendship, respect for the historical past, love for the motherland and protection of the environment; -   the broadcasting of cultural, creative, educational, moral, ethical and other socially-oriented programmes; -   regular reflection of our people’s struggle for the defence of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of our country; -   respect [given] to the rights of the ethnic minorities; -   advocacy for ethnic-minority cultures and universal culture; -   advocacy for democratic values, legal knowledge and a healthy lifestyle; -   the broadcasting of educational programmes for children and minors; -   the regular broadcasting of programmes on youth topics: vocational training, healthy lifestyle and sex education; -   the regular broadcasting of programmes advocating for the prevention of violence, criminality, cruelty, prostitution and drug use; -   the prevention of the broadcasting of pornographic material and the (limitation in a manner defined by law) of the broadcasting of programmes depicting erotica and cruelty to children and minors; -   the possession of a creative staff [with] potential and experience in the field of television and radio broadcasting to ensure the effective realisation of the programme concept; -   possession of the modern technical and financial resources necessary for broadcasting; -   the application of modern television and radio technologies; -   the compliance of the documents submitted for obtaining the licence with the terms of the competition; -   the broadcasting of programmes, telecasts and topics that cannot be broadcast by other broadcasters; -   strict observance of the laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan and having a perfect reputation; -   the results of public hearings and other competition procedures.” 40 .     Regulations on the National Television and Radio Council, adopted by a Presidential decree of 5 October 2002, provided as follows: “1.     The [NTRC] was established by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated 5 October 2002, in accordance with Article 11.2 of the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan ‘On Television and Radio Broadcasting’. The NTRC was created to ensure the implementation of State policy in the field of television and radio broadcasting and the regulation of this activity. ... 3.     The [NTRC] is financed from the State budget and is independent in its activities. 4.     The [NTRC] has an independent balance sheet, a seal [that bears] the State Emblem of the Republic of Azerbaijan and its name, corresponding stamps, letterheads and bank accounts. ... 8.     The [NTRC] carries out the following functions, in accordance with its obligations provided by these Regulations: ... 8.3.     determines the rules and conditions for a competition for a special permit (licence) ... ... 11.     The [NTRC] is created by the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan and consists of nine members. 12.     Persons with dual citizenship, persons who have an obligation to other States, persons serving within the systems of the executive or the judiciary powers, persons engaged in paid activities (with the exception of teaching and creative activities), clerics, persons whose legal incapacity has been confirmed by a court [and] persons convicted of serious crimes cannot be appointed as members of the [NTRC]. 13.     Three of the members are appointed for two years, three for four years, and three for six years. [NTRC] members are eligible for re-appointment. A new member of the [NTRC] who is appointed to replace a member whose term of office has ended or whose membership is terminated before the expiration of the term of office is appointed for a six-year term. 14.     Until the end of their [respective] terms of office, the members of the [NTRC] cannot be removed from their office, except in the following circumstances: (i)     at their own request, (ii)     upon termination of their citizenship of the Republic of Azerbaijan or acceptance of the citizenship of another State, (iii)     in the event of committing a criminal offence and the existence of a final court judgment in this regard, (iv)     in the event that they hold a position at the State bodies, are a cleric, [or] are engaging in entrepreneurial, commercial or other paid activities (except for scientific, pedagogical and creative activities). 15. The [NTRC] members cannot make a statement or take part in an event that casts doubt on their independence and impartiality. 16. No official person or body may issue orders or instructions to the members of the [NTRC]. ...” RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL DOCUMENTS Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe 41 .     On 20 December 2000 the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted Recommendation Rec(2000)23   to member States on the independence and functions of regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector, in which it recommended that the member States,   inter alia , “include provisions in their legislation and measures in their policies entrusting the regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector with powers which enable them to fulfil their missions, as prescribed by national law, in an effective, independent and transparent manner, in accordance with the guidelines set out in the appendix to this recommendation”. 42 .     The guidelines appended to the recommendation provide, inter alia : “... 3.     The rules governing regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector, especially their membership, are a key element of their independence. Therefore, they should be defined so as to protect them against any interference, in particular by political forces or economic interests. 4.     For this purpose, specific rules should be defined as regards incompatibilities in order to avoid that: –     regulatory authorities are under the influence of political power; –     members of regulatory authorities exercise functions or hold interests in enterprises or other organisations in the media or related sectors, which might lead to a conflict of interest in connection with membership of the regulatory authority. 5.     Furthermore, rules should guarantee that the members of these authorities: –     are appointed in a democratic and transparent manner; –     may not receive any mandate or take any instructions from any person or body; –     do not make any statement or undertake any action which may prejudice the independence of their functions and do not take any advantage of them. ... 13.     One of the essential tasks of regulatory authorities in the broadcasting sector is normally the granting of broadcasting licences. The basic conditions and criteria governing the granting and renewal of broadcasting licences should be clearly defined in the law. 14.     The regulations governing the broadcasting licensing procedure should be clear and precise and should be applied in an open, transparent and impartial manner. The decisions made by the regulatory authorities in this context should be subject to adequate publicity. ... 27.     All decisions taken and regulations adopted by the regulatory authorities should be: –     duly reasoned, in accordance with national law; –     open to review by the competent jurisdictions according to national law; –     made available to the public.” 43.     Other relevant Committee of Ministers recommendations (namely Recommendation No. R(99)1 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on measures to promote media pluralism, Recommendation Rec(2003)9 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on measures to promote the democratic and social contribution of digital broadcasting, and Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)2 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on media pluralism and diversity of media content) are cited in Centro   Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC] (no. 38433/09, §§ 70-72, ECHR 2012). Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the independence and functions of regulatory authorities for the broadcasting sector   ( Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 26 March 2008 at the 1022nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies ) 44 .     The relevant extracts of this Declaration provide as follows: “13.     In most Council of Europe member states, the members of regulatory authorities are appointed by the parliament or by the head of state at the proposal of parliament. In some member states, in order to ensure that the membership of the regulatory authority reflects the country’s social and political diversity, part or all of the members are nominated by non-governmental groups which are considered to be representative of society. Further, in a few member states, the law provides objective selection criteria for the appointment of members. By contrast, in a number of countries, members are appointed by sole decision of one state authority, e.g. the head of state or a state department, often without clearly specified selection criteria. The appointment of members of regulatory authorities by the head of state and/or parliament has sometimes been criticised advancing that, in such cases, membership would represent or reproduce political power structures. 14.     Concerns have often been raised that the nominating or appointing bodies could exert pressure on the members after their appointment. In fact, in some member states, the members of regulatory authorities are frequently accused of acting on behalf of the state body that designated them or political formation behind the designating or appointing authority.” Other relevant documents 45 .     The following are extracts from the Report by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights on his visit to Azerbaijan from 3 to 7   September 2007 (CommDH(2008)2, 20 February 2008): “66. Electronic media are naturally the key providers of information and opinion to the citizen. There are 7 national and about 14 regional TV channels as well as 10 radio channels. Five of the TV channels are private, and only one TV channel is generally considered as independent, which raises the issue of access to frequencies and licenses. In Azerbaijan, there is a National Television and Radio Council (hereafter NTRC), in charge of allocating frequencies. Though the institution is meant to be independent, it is not perceived as such. The NTRC is often portrayed as impeding rather than favouring the development of a free media market, failing to rely on objective criteria for the choice among bidders and for delaying processes of genuine competition by means of all sort of administrative hindrances. The long procedure about the granting of license to the ANS channel, months ago, was a sad example. Another obstacle stems from the law, which requires that founders of television and radio broadcasters be citizens of Azerbaijan. As a result, foreign radio outlets were exceptionally issued with licenses, and then only for a short duration. In talks with the Commissioner, the chair of the Council dismissed many of the complaints and insisted that the main problems were the lack of good media professionals and the little respect paid by some bidders towards procedures. Nevertheless, the Commissioner strongly feels that major improvements are needed here in order to strengthen both the legal guarantee of independence, a state of mind of actual independence, and a better representation of society at large. 67. The Commissioner also wants to recall the recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe concerning regulatory bodies [Recommendation(200