CAB seeks to intervene in Genex court case that questions CRTC jurisdiction

The CRTC is a vital cog in the broadcasting system and must have jurisdiction over it, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) hopes to tell the Federal Court of Appeal in the Genex Communications Inc. case. The CAB filed this month for leave to intervene in the case, in which Genex argues that the CRTC doesn’t have the jurisdiction to revoke its radio licence for CHOI-FM (CCR Update, Sept. 1/04). The CAB argues to the contrary, but isn’t taking a stand on the Genex situation itself. "As you know, we don’t always agree with what the commission says or what they do. But we do feel that it’s in the public interest and in the broadcasting system’s interest that the government be supported in having established one single expert and central agency to supervise and regulate the broadcasting system," CAB president and CEO Glenn O’Farrell tells Canadian Communications Reports. "We’re saying that the CRTC has, in our view, legitimate jurisdiction to exercise its regulatory and supervisory authority over the broadcasting system. We’re not commenting on what the commission did in terms of exercising that jurisdiction in the case of Genex." O’Farrell says that the CRTC should legitimately be able to award, suspend or revoke licences, as spelled out in the Broadcasting Act. He notes that a single regulatory body, complemented by a self-policing agency, is needed to maintain the integrity of the broadcast system. Part of the reason that the CRTC decided against renewing the CHOI-FM radio licence was that owner Genex was found to have breached some of the codes of conduct established by the self-regulatory body, the Canadian Broadcast Standard Council (CBSC). "Fundamentally, we feel that it is in the interests of the Canadian public to have a place where they can complain, where they can submit their views, where they can intervene in broadcast proceedings, whether it is on policy matters or on licensing matters, to an expert tribunal," O’Farrell says. Genex’s court appeal raises issues that go well beyond the renewal of its licence, the CAB states in its leave to intervene filed on September 17. "Genex seeks a declaration that the CRTC does not have jurisdiction under the Broadcasting Act to regulate the content of broadcasting…The CAB wishes to put before this Honourable Court its unique perspective as a representative of other Canadian private broadcasters, who have supported a regulatory framework that includes self-regulation of content to ensure that Canadian broadcasting remains of the highest quality," states the request for leave to intervene. The CAB is seeking to file evidence on only one of the questions raised by Genex - that the Radio Regulations don’t give the CRTC the right to act as a censor or a referee of content on radio. "This Honourable Court’s decision as to the CRTC’s authority under these provisions will affect CAB members’ adherence to regulations, conditions of licence and day-to-day operations. As programming is the heart of broadcasters’ business, the extent of the CRTC’s regulatory authority over the content of that programming is direct, substantive and economic," reads the CAB’s motion. The CAB argues that the CRTC’s regulatory authority over the content of broadcast programming is defined within the Broadcasting Act, and that section 3 sets out Canada’s broadcasting policy and contains numerous references to the importance of broadcasting regulation to the public. The leave to intervene further states, "Through both regulations and codes, the CRTC, and the self-regulatory CBSC, ensure that all broadcast programming - including but not only radio programming - is of a high standard and address the broadcasting of: anything in contravention of the law; any abusive comment that, when taken in context, tends or is likely to expose an individual to hatred or contempt on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age or mental or physical disability; any obscene or profane language; and certain other matters not referable to the present proceeding…The CRTC regulatory and CAB self-regulatory system structure is vital in protecting the interests of minorities and other vulnerable groups," reads the CAB submission. O’Farrell says that if granted leave to intervene, the CAB will go into greater depth in making its points. He would not elaborate on those points during an interview since the CAB "needs to see what kind of position other parties will take on the basis of our request as it currently reads." The CAB proposes filing its written submission to the court by March 13, 10 days after the filing of the respondent, the CRTC, to "ensure both that its submissions are not duplicative of those made by the respondents and that its submissions do not delay the process of the hearing of the appeal." The court will decide whether or not to grant the broadcasters’ lobby the opportunity to intervene on the basis of a series of criteria, including that the proposed intervention brings a fresh perspective to the court, that the proposed argument is important to the proceeding, and that only the party seeking leave to intervene is in a position to present that unique case.

CAB seeks to intervene in Genex court case that questions CRTC jurisdiction

Broadcast | September 29, 2004

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us