The Law establishes no separate authority for objecting to a Board decision. The only route expressly in the text is the re-examination application provided for works in respect of which three decisions have been given.
The Only Express Route of Application in the Law - Art. 4/7
The subsequent issues of periodical works, and the subsequent editions of other printed works, in respect of which three harmful publication decisions have been given are subject to the limitations without the need for a further decision. However:
The owners of such works may apply to the Board and request an examination, claiming that the subsequent issues and editions of their works are not of a nature harmful to minors. If the Board finds the application justified, the limitations in this article are not applied to the subsequent issues and editions.
| Element | Provision |
|---|---|
| Who applies? | The owners of the work |
| When? | Where three harmful publication decisions have been given |
| What do they assert? | That the subsequent issues and editions are not of a harmful nature |
| To whom? | To the Board |
| Result | If the Board finds it justified, the limitations are not applied to subsequent issues and editions |
The Nature of the Decision
A Board decision is an act given by a board formed within a ministry and producing legal consequences for persons. The decision is notified (Art. 4/1, under the provisions of the Notification Law) and gives rise to a financial obligation (additional Art. 1/b - 40%).
Is There a Period in the Law?
The Period for the Financial Obligation Keeps Running
Additional Art. 1/b: the sum at the rate of 40% over the total sale price including VAT of the print run of the work is paid within one month of the date of notification of the Board's decision. If it is not paid, the provisions of Law No. 6183 are applied.
We cover the detail in the Mass Housing Fund guide.
Points of Defence
Three bases emerging from the text of the Law:
- Art. 6 - outside the scope: if the work possesses intellectual, social, scientific or aesthetic value it is outside the scope of the Law.
- Art. 2/2 - review of the criterion: in its examination the Board is obliged to have regard to the general aims and basic principles in Basic Law of National Education No. 1739.
- Art. 4/1 - procedure: the decision must be notified to the owners, responsible editors and copyright holders and under the provisions of the Notification Law.
We cover the Art. 6 exception in the science and art exception guide.
The Constitutional Framework
A harmful publication decision is an interference with press freedom and is subject to the filters of Art. 13 of the Constitution: a limitation must be made only by law, without touching the essence of the right, and in conformity with the requirements of the democratic order of society and the principle of proportionality.
When the ordinary legal remedies are exhausted, an individual application under Art. 148 of the Constitution may come into play. We cover the detail in the individual application guide.
Summary
Law No. 1117 establishes no separate authority for objecting to a Board decision. The only express route in the text is Art. 4/7: the owners of works in respect of which three harmful publication decisions have been given may apply to the Board for an examination, claiming that subsequent issues and editions are not of a harmful nature; if the Board finds it justified the limitations are not applied to subsequent issues. Judicial review of the decision proceeds under the general procedural legislation.