The Committee of Ministers,
Having regard to Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection
of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as
"the convention");
Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of
Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the
convention, relating to the application lodged by De Geillustreerde
Pers N.V. against the Netherlands (No. 5178/71);
Whereas on 16 September 1976 the Commission transmitted the said
report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three
months provided for in Article 32.1 (art. 32-1) of the convention has
elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court
of Human Rights, in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the
convention;
Whereas in its application lodged on 24 September 1971, the
applicant company allege that it is prevented by Dutch legislation
from publishing the complete radio and television programme data and
that it is discriminated against in so far as under the legislation
concerned the broadcasting organisations and some publishers are
allowed to publish complete programme information or at least
summaries thereof;
Whereas the Commission on 12 October 1973 declared the application
admissible and in its report adopted on 6 July 1976 considered that
the protection of the commercial interests of particular newspapers or
groups of newspapers was not contemplated by the terms of Article 10
(art. 10) of the convention and that the measures concerned could not
in any way be regarded as discriminating against the applicant
company;
Whereas in its report the Commission expressed the opinion that there
had not been a violation of Article 10 (art. 10) of the convention nor
of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 10 (art. 14+10) in the
present case;
Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in
accordance with Article 31.1 (art. 31-1) of the convention;
Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32.1 (art. 32-1)
of the convention,
Decides that in this case there was no violation of the Convention for
the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.