CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 28 mars 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 28 March 2017   FIRST SECTION Application no. 66984/14 ASSOCIAZIONE POLITICA NAZIONALE LISTA MARCO PANNELLA against Italy lodged on 2 October 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant is a political organisation. The Communications Regulatory Authority ( Autorità per le garanzie nelle comunicazioni ) ordered the State television corporation ( RAI - Radiotelevisione Italiana S.p.A. ), in execution of the judgment of the Lazio Regional Administrative Court of 14 March 2013, to invite members of the applicant organisation to attend a number of prominent political talk shows. The order was, however, only partially enforced. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Having regard to the principles established by the Court under Article   10 of the Convention, notably in its judgments in the cases of Manole and Others v. Moldova (no. 13936/02, §§ 95-102, ECHR 2009 (extracts)), Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy ([GC], no.   38433/09, §§ 129-135, ECHR 2012), and Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom ([GC], no. 48876/08, §§ 100-105, ECHR 2013 (extracts)),   a)     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, in particular its right to impart information and ideas?   b)     Did the State comply with its duty to ensure that the public has access through television and radio to impartial and accurate information and a range of opinion and comment, reflecting inter alia the diversity of political outlook within the country?   c)     Did the national legislative and administrative framework guarantee effective pluralism?   2.     Had there been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in light of the failure of the Communications Regulatory Authority to ensure the full enforcement of the judgment of the Lazio Regional Administrative Court of 14 March 2013?