 |
   
|
|
|||||||||||
|
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
CRA Report on the process of issuance of Long-Term Broadcasting Licences in Bosnia and Herzegovina
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Monday, April 15, 2002 |
  
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CRA Report on the process of issuance of Long-Term Broadcasting Licences in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Prepared by the CRA Broadcast Division April 2002 TABLE OF CONTENT: I. Introduction II. Merit-Based Competitive Process for Awarding of Long-Term Licences III. The Rule Procedure IV. Results of the process of issuance of long-term licences in BiH V. Tuzla region VI. Brcko region VII Doboj region VIII. Kotor Varos region IX. Sarajevo region X. Banja Luka region XI. Bugojno region XII. Konjic region XIII. Gorazde region XIV. Trebinje region XV. Mostar region XVI. Livno region XVII. Bihac region
ANNEXES: Annex 1 Map of regions in Bosnia and Herzegovina Annex 2 CRA Licensing Letter L-15 Annex 3 Letter of technical information Annex 4 Results BiH Annex 5 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Tuzla region Annex 6 Tuzla region results Annex 7 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Brcko region Annex 8 Brcko region results Annex 9 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Doboj region Annex 10 Doboj region results Annex 11 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Kotor Varos region Annex 12 Kotor Varos region results Annex 13 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Sarajevo region Annex 14 Sarajevo region results Annex 15 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Banja Luka region Annex 16 Banja Luka region results Annex 17 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Bugojno region Annex 18 Bugojno region results Annex 19 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Konjic region Annex 20 Konjic region results Annex 21 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Gorazde region Annex 22 Gorazde region results Annex 23 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Trebinje region Annex 24 Trebinje region results Annex 25 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Mostar region Annex 26 Mostar region results Annex 27 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Livno region Annex 28 Livno region results Annex 29 List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Bihac region Annex 30 Bihac region results I. Introduction Communication Regulatory Agency (CRA)[1] is an independent regulatory body, whose activities and efforts are of pioneer nature, in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Responsibilities connected to broadcasting include awarding of broadcasting licences, programme monitoring, and standard setting in terms of establishment of codes of practice. The name of the agency itself comprises of a word regulation. Regulation in itself means establishment and maintenance of order in the field of communication – and in particular of broadcasting media. However, it does not mean that regulation is to be understood in terms of censorship. On the contrary, regulation means positive approach to establishment and enabling of professional media in BiH. Another aspect of communication regulation importance is found in the fact that freedom of speech and freedom of expression have their responsibilities. As the Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights states, the exercise of free expression may be subject to “such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.” The IMC has adopted standards for broadcasting programmes, which are incorporated in the Broadcasting Code of Practice, Advertising and Sponsorship Code, and other rules and regulations, together with those sections of individual licences applying to programme provision. In addition to the provisions from the Decision of the High Representative from 2 March, 2001 pertaining to remaining in force of all rules and regulations established by the IMC and transferred over to the CRA (as referred to in footnote 1), CRA Rule No. 10/2001, decided upon by the CRA Council, states in the Article 2 “Amendment of IMC legal acts” that: “In accordance with the present Decision, all references to the Independent Media Commission or the IMC in any legal act in force and adopted by the Independent Media Commission shall henceforth be taken to refer to the Communications Regulatory Agency”. Every broadcasting station has been provided with copies of each of these documents, at the same moment when they were adopted and as soon as they were publicly announced. In its regulatory mandate over broadcasting, the CRA sets the standards for programme content (based on the aforementioned codes, rules, and regulations) and ensures that broadcasters comply with them. Codes include topics covering:
The CRA also regulates to ensure that quality and diversity of public station’s programs are maintained, as stated in the CRA Rule 01/1999: “Definition and Obligations of Public Broadcasting.” In addition, the CRA, with the set of regulations and requirements in terms of technical and financial capacities of broadcasters, puts efforts into ensuring safe and interference-free broadcasting environment, as well as that of a reasonable financial viability. II. Merit Based Competitive Process for the Awarding of Long-Term Licence The allocation of frequencies and management of the frequency spectrum is in all countries based on the planning of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU).[2] The main task for states that are members of ITU is to make sure the use of the frequency spectrum is in accordance with ITU rules and that interference is avoided. This task is an obligation that follows from ITU membership and it is consequently obligatory for ITU members to have a system for giving the right to use the spectrum. The radio frequency spectrum of BiH was planned with the ITU during the time of former Yugoslavia. The Stockholm and Geneva Broadcast Frequency plans of 1961 and 1984 are not adapted to the situation today. Before the establishment of the IMC, frequency management and broadcast licensing was handled by different bodies in different parts of BiH, with no co-ordination and little respect for any rules. The broadcasters in many cases did not apply for any licence at all but just started broadcasting or changed frequencies or other parameters. After registration of the existing situation in this field (which was done through the process of issuance of provisional licences or “Phase I”), the IMC started the Merit Based Competitive Process for the Awarding of Long-Term Licence (“Phase II”), as of 1 October 2000. The Competition process has been done through the established Competitive Rule (hereinafter the Rule.) It is important to emphasize that the CRA has provided a unique example by the Phase II process, in terms of being the only regulatory agency adopting the rules pertaining to the issuance of long-term licences (hereinafter Licence) which are based on merit-based competition. As for the situation in reference to the frequency spectrum, the IMC approached the issue by adopting pre-coordinated frequency lists (in accordance with the Geneva Plan ’84) for each region[3], while the whole country was divided into 13 regions down geographical lines in order to allow greater efficient management of the frequency spectrum (Annex 1.) One of the goals was to reduce i.e. eliminate interference problem, which was extensively widespread. Also, it was intended to stabilize the frequency spectrum in the region of South East Europe. In connection to that, the CRA has organized a regional conference of all electronic media regulatory agencies and relevant institutions of the states in question, together with the ITU representatives, in order to further develop and set frequency plans for the region, based on the division of newly created states. This conference took place from 5-7 September 2001 in Sarajevo. Full account of the outcomes and conclusions from this Conference can be obtained from the CRA on request. The objective of the Rule has been to allow the CRA to select the broadcasters most suitable and best prepared to provide high-quality and professional contents, in BiH. The Rule applied in following cases:
- the proper development of a fair, professional, and viable media market in BiH; - diversity of programme content; - expressed public interest. In addition to examining applications according to the general criteria for awarding Licences, the application of this Rule included a process comprising of assessment and evaluation of the broadcasters on the basis of points scored in four criteria: programme quality, financial information and viability, technical operations, and prior compliance with the CRA rules and regulations. When the CRA informed relevant broadcasters that they are subjects to the Rule, or it designated a region that falls under the rule, it made its decision public to encourage public participation in the process. The local community, other broadcasters, and interested parties have had the opportunity to submit comments 30 days from the date of publication of the decision. All stations interested to compete in the process have been requested to submit their applications for the process of issuance of Licences. Responses were required on staff and programme, finance and market research, and technical operations. With the Decision on commencement of competition in designated regions, applicants, whose applications were incomplete, have been sent a letter (CRA Licensing Letter L-15[4]) requesting additional information according to the general criteria of the Rule (this is done after initial review of applications is done.) The CRA has concluded the process of the implementation of the Rule throughout the country. At the beginning of this process, the adopted procedure included the part according to which every station has sent separate applications for each of the established regions in BiH, if it was competing in it. Tuzla region was taken as the first one due to the high density of broadcasters in that region, followed by Brcko region, which is adjacent to Tuzla, and then Doboj region. After the process of implementation of the Rule in these three regions, broadcasters were invited to apply simultaneously for remaining 10 regions. This included the procedure in which each broadcaster was invited to send one application, which was then assessed and evaluated for each region in which broadcasters expressed aspiration to be broadcasting, with the sequence of evaluating regions remaining the same, according to the schedule that can be found in Annex 1. This has been decided upon consultations with the broadcasting community and the CRA experts, since it released broadcasters a great burden in terms of having to send multiple applications for each region they were competing in, but also for the CRA to be able to implement the aforementioned Rule in a timely manner and to avoid unnecessary multiple assessments and evaluations of the same information. This also meant that, in case of station’s failure to meet the necessary requirements in any of the aforementioned categories, in all or any region it competed in, one combined appeal was to be lodged to the CRA Council, rather than the number of appeals which corresponds to the number of regions that station had applied in. As for the awarding or denying the Licence, it has been done at the moment when a broadcaster ended its competition. It is important to note that every broadcaster had an opportunity to appeal the CRA decisions on non-qualification to the CRA Council, which acts as an appellate body, offering the second-instance legal remedy to broadcasters. This report addresses and analyses ways of implementation of evaluations and assessments of each broadcaster according to set criteria and categories, and draws overall conclusions on meeting the goals and intended achievements of this process, and the assessment of the applicability and appropriateness of the Rule to the media landscape in BiH. The report is prepared in a way as to include overall analysis on the statistical data of the process’s results and categories which were predominant in reaching decisions of qualification/non-qualification for the Licence. In addition, the separate analysis of the results of the implementation of the Rule in each of 13 regions is presented, including detailed analysis of the number of qualified and non-qualified broadcasters in each region, determining categories for issuance/non-issuance of the Licence, as well as the decisions of the CRA Council, together with presentation of points scored by each broadcaster in every region it competed in. It is very important to note that all assignments concerning the implementation of the Rule were completed by the CRA within the period of one year. Considering the extremely large number of broadcasting stations in BiH, as well as complex procedure of the Rule, it required considerable effort by the staff teams involved, co-ordinated by the Project Manager. III. The Rule Procedures The initial process, after receiving the application, undergone by the CRA was that of the analysis, consisting of assessment and evaluation of each applicant, done by the joint efforts of experts from the CRA divisions and departments[5]. These divisions and departments gave overall assessment of each applicant, reviewing levels of standards and professionalism of stations. Each applicant has been awarded points for the level of the compliance with the aforementioned criteria, maximum of 20 for programme content assessments and evaluations, and 10 for each of engineering and financial assessments and evaluations. Minimum points required are 12 for programme content, and 6 for both engineering and financial assessments. Also considered are any prior violations of the Broadcasting Code of Practice, and other rules and regulations, in terms of negative points for each of breaches. In the case of a station’s receiving a requirement to publish an apology, warning, or order, negative points were than given to a station, one for each of the aforementioned. Also, in the case of a station’s paying fine to the CRA (due to violations or repeated breaches of rules and regulations), negative points were given, two for each of the paid fine. Finally, for each suspension of licence or decision to close down operations a station has received from the CRA, negative points were given, three for each of the aforementioned.These negative points are then subtracted from the total number of points every station gained from the aforementioned evaluations and assessments. This has been followed with a final evaluation of each applicant by the CRA experts, taking into consideration all of the above. Failure to receive a minimum from any of the final evaluations resulted in a denial of licence. The minimum number of points needed for qualification is 24 (considering that the necessary minimums in categories of programme quality, technical and financial requirements are met); however, in case of large number of negative points due to prior violations of the CRA rules and regulations for any station, if, when these numbers subtracted from the general score, should the case be that the final score then is lower than 24, the station has not qualified for the licence. However, it needs to be noted that the CRA Council has, at its meeting on 10-11 March, 2002, decided to award conditional Licences to the 4 stations[6], under the strict condition that these one-year licences will be immediately revoked, should a station breach the CRA Rules and Regulations. Once the qualified broadcasters have been determined by the implementation of the Rule, including the appellate process, then the Frequency Spectrum Division works on offering the technical terms and conditions for each broadcaster. Here, it is important to note that there are a few categories which need to be considered. First, in each region, there is limited number of regional frequencies offered. CRA takes into account all the applications from broadcasters who expressed desires to get regional coverage. Out of these that have been qualified, the CRA then selects broadcasters who have gained the biggest number of points scored (out of these who have applied for regional coverage), and, accordingly, allocates frequencies which enable regional coverage for these stations. It has to be noted that, in cases where there is lesser number of qualified broadcasters then available frequencies for regional coverage, these frequencies are then not allocated. Also, Frequency Spectrum Division, when doing the final preparation of technical terms and conditions for qualified broadcasters, it takes into consideration the desires of broadcasters, measuring them together with the actual frequency capacities, issues of interference, etc. Finally, it should also be noted that all the qualified broadcasters have to relocate from the high-altitude sites in BiH, since they are reserved for PBS, RTV FBiH, and RT RS. In addition, the three aforementioned public stations have not been part of the competition process; hence, have not been included in the statistics and analysis presented. The way evaluation and assessment of broadcasters by established categories was done is explained in detail below, starting with the programme content, financial, and technical part of evaluation and assessment. a) Programme content Issues of programme content are of a very sensitive nature, and the process of assessing and evaluating has been complicated and difficult. That is why programme content evaluation process has been very detailed and objective, being done in full accordance with the established procedure. Criteria and standards for the analysis are found in the aforementioned codes, rules and regulations. Each station has been required to, besides describing their programme in writing, also send full recordings for two days, one for a week day, and the other for one of weekend days. Total of 10 people have been involved in the process of assessment and evaluation of station’s programme, including 2 people from each of CRA Regional offices. Internal procedure established that not only one analyst makes analysis of the same station that applied for more than one region. This meant that if particular station has applied in two different regions, two different analysts evaluated programmes. Second step in this procedure has been that the CRA Broadcast Division Coordinator, based on the aforementioned analyses, proposes the grades for the programme, according to programme quality requirements, comprising of:
CRA Broadcast Division Coordinator participated in meetings, where relevant members of the CRA divisions and departments, discussed and gave proposals for grades in each of the required categories, i.e. engineering, finance, and programme content. Proposed grades for programme content were then discussed with the Director of Broadcast Division. Third step comprised of a process in which the Director of Broadcast Division re-evaluated analyses and proposed grades, in order to reach a final assessment of programme quality. The conclusion of the process comprised of assignment of points for each station, in accordance to the aforementioned scale. These grades were then presented at a final meeting, attended by senior management of relevant divisions and departments, where final decisions for each station were reached. Important to note is that each application has also been subject to comments by Public Affairs and Legal Department. Public opinion has also been taken into consideration during the process of assessment and evaluation of programme content. In order to further encourage public participation, besides the comments and opinions submitted by the public (upon the public announcement of specific regions becoming a subject to the Rule), CRA requested professional service from PRISM Research Agency, Sarajevo, which recruited the members of the focus groups exploring reactions to the programmes that they can watch/listen in the respective regions, in forms of Public Consultative Panels. Thirteen focus groups involving approximately 100 participants took place in different cities of BiH. This provided CRA with additional valuable information about the voice of public on broadcast programmes of different stations. Method for evaluation of programme content section of applications First, the programme analysts reviewed each application in order to make a distinction between private and public radio and television stations. This has been necessary because of the additional regulations for public stations. A public station’s programme content has a special set of obligations, in terms of variety of programmes, percentage of information programmes in comparison to other types of programmes, marketing time, children’s and religions programmes, etc. Second step taken by analysts was to read through and assess the textual part of application, referring to the programme content issues. Then the analyst proceeded with actual assessment of recorded material, comparing it to the textual application, which had to include listings of programme schemes for that station. It was important that analysts assess how serious each station has approached the application submission process. Analysts also took into consideration time of broadcasting listed in programme schedule, comparing it to the actual recordings, i.e. whether the recordings included the entire submitted programme schedule, and made a note on the total amount of programmes. That meant that analysts noted any changes between programme schedule and broadcast programme, as it is recorded on submitted video and/or audio-tapes, or CD’s. Several aspects of the analysis included: 1. Quality of production assessment This part of analysis paid special attention to production components of broadcast programmes, including: - quality of audio and/or video signal; - non-interruption of continuation of programme, i.e. black screens for TV stations, sound interference for radio, etc.; - quality of self-produced reports and programmes, for example coverage of press-conferences; - creativity of marketing material, jingles, announcements of certain types of programmes. 2. Content analysis Public stations Following categories were used for analysis of programmes of both public and private broadcasters (private stations that have diverse programmes, comprising of some or all of following categories): (a) division of programme on various content parts; (b) informative programme (news and political overview programmes including news from domestic and international scene); b.1) distinction between news and informative programme:
(c) children and educational programme:
(d) religious programme:
(e) entertainment and music programme:
(f) films and documentaries: richness (diversity) of programme scheme;
(g) marketing:
Other aspects of programmes in connection to both private and public stations have also been the role and approach of anchors, journalists, editors, and other personnel, since this category is of a great importance for achieving an overall impression of professionalism of each station. This also refers to the way live programmes are conducted, the broadcaster’s approach towards guests in programmes and participating audience etc. 3. Analysis conclusions
Maximum points of 20 are awarded for a programme quality satisfying the necessary requirements, while a minimum number of 12 points were required for positive assessment in the part dealing with programme content. As for prior compliance with the rules and regulations, Broadcast Division checked this for each applicant (as explained on page 7). b) Financial information Here, each applicant has been assessed, taking into consideration overall financial information and viability. This included:
Method for evaluation of financial section of applications The process of evaluating financial viability of broadcasters and their managerial skills has been conducted by reviewing financial reports and Business Plan submitted by stations. Financial viability has been evaluated by reviewing financial reports, balance sheets, income statements and cash-flow reports for the period of two years, namely 1999 and 2000. These reports provided the basis for analyzing data on income and liabilities in the aforementioned period. In the scope of this analysis, indicators of gross profit margin and net profit margin were discerned, including operational profit margin, which indicates relation between profit, income and liabilities. In addition, analysis of financial information included analysis of the sources of financing aimed at determining self-sustenance or potential dependence of the broadcaster on financial resources. The analysis included analysis of obligations and property, which provided significant indicators on financial solvency of broadcasters, and relation between income and liabilities. The financial analysis provided sound basis for determining nature of company’s operation in the past two years, whether it had positive or negative financial result. Some other issues included sources of financing, whether the station can meet its obligations and how promptly, and what is its property structure. Management skills for running the company have been assessed by reviewing Business Plan submitted by the broadcasters. In the scope of this Plan, analysis of marketing plans for the next two years i.e. method to be used by the broadcaster in promoting its services has been done. Furthermore, another factor taken into consideration was the analysis of competition that addressed a number of broadcasters to be found in their respective region or the area they are applying for, impact of competition on broadcasters operation, and audience research. Business Plan should also include analysis of target market covering research on number of businesses in a given region, as well as potential clients interested in cooperation with the broadcaster. Business Plan may potentially entail solutions to existing financial predicaments, if the station is facing any such problems. All the aforementioned provided overall picture of operations, both in the past and in the future. Period in question referred to 4 years, past two and upcoming two. The maximum number of points to be allocated to a broadcaster was 10, being divided in two sections, namely maximum of 5 points for financial analysis and 5 points for the plan of future operation. c) Engineering information Here, an assessment of all applications has been done, concentrating on technical part of operations. For this, issues included were:
Method for evaluation of technical section of applications According to the guiding method (Annex 3), evaluation of the engineering aspect of each applicant has been done based on the written correspondence and results obtained through direct inspections. The applicants were required to submit the set of data that described the following:
All documents received by the CRA on any basis have been taken into consideration, for instance, technical study, documentation about interference, compliance with technical guidelines, etc. Each application has been considered according to the following procedure:
It is important to say that numeric evaluations, and not the textual description, defined the final evaluation. The comment considered as important by the analyzer have been written separately, and it did not influence the evaluation but only the access to documentation, and it could have also been used as an additional argument in defending the evaluation, in case it appeared important. All comments and evaluations were available to the applicant if so required, and were presented in a uniformed language. In case of any doubts, the numeric evaluation prevailed. In the letter sent to broadcasters (previously mentioned Annex 3) requirements for technical operations information has been listed. Behind each paragraph, there was an explanation of the way of assessment of submitted information, written in italic font. IV. Results of the process of issuance of long-term broadcasting licences in BiH[7] 1. STATIONS THAT APPLIED FOR ISSUANCE OF THE LICENCE:
2. QUALIFIED STATIONS:
Out of this number, 7 applicants, i.e. stations that will commence their broadcasting operations, qualified for the Licence:
3. NOT QUALIFIED STATIONS:
a) Applied categories in evaluation and assessment of broadcasters An overview analysis of the actual situation related to the stations which participated in the competition process is best seen through the analysis of requirements from each of the three categories that have been used for evaluation and assessment of stations, i.e. financial, technical and programme content requirements. This overview is done taking into account the categories and information for each of the segment (as noted on pages 7-13).
1. Balance and depth of information in the news and factual programming: While analysing this item, it has been noticed that large majority of stations work towards ensurance of balancing and depth of information by, beside their informative programmes, rebroadcast of other broadcasters’ programme, mostly foreign ones (VOA, Radio Free Europe, Radio Deutsche Welle, BBC). Also, majority of stations is compensating its informative programme by rebroadcast of central informative shows and central news of Radio Republika Srpska (RS based stations) and Radio BiH (FBiH based stations). As to informative programme from stations’ own production, its scope and quality are directly depending on station’s financial ability for production. Majority of “small”, local stations both in RS and FBiH are mostly broadcasting Flash news including agency news, since it shows to be the easiest and financially most viable way to provide information, also having one central informative show which deals with the most important events in the station’s city and immediate surrounding. Stations that cover a region or a canton are nourishing investigating journalism, with correspondents from the region, entity or the entire country (mostly applies to cantonal stations in FBiH, as well as the stations covering wider region with its programme). Stations in RS, except Radio RS, are covering only local community with their signal. Common for all stations is programme production with guests in studio (officials from local, entity authorities, representatives of political parties, etc.), whereby listeners ask questions via contact programme. Informative programme of private stations, which mostly have music orientations in programmes, predominantly comes to reading of short agency news and service information. 2. Contribution to diversity of programme services available to general or specific audiences (including age, education, gender and ethnic or cultural background): Beside public stations, which are bound by the Rule 01/1999 to ensure certain diversity in their programme, private stations that are not restricted only to music-entertaining contents in their programmes, also broadcast relatively diverse programme contents. Most of the stations broadcast educational programmes dedicated to all population groups, including educational shows for both youth and adults. Also, a lot of radio stations broadcast children contents in their programme, whilst for all TV stations (both public and private), it can be said that the same broadcast the children programmes. Some stations are included in group projects, which are usually sponsored by international organisations or institutions (for example the Project Gender). Speaking of attention dedicated by private stations to return of refugees and displaced persons, it is solely depending on editorial policy of each individual broadcaster. During analysis of programme quality it has been noticed that some stations are devoting their attention to groups of persons with disabilities and their associations, by continuous reporting on their activities within their informative shows, or by including regular timeframes for presenting activities of those associations in programme schemes. 3. Use of documented demographic evidence in support of programme plans: All stations which have qualified for the Licence have submitted more and less comprehensive explanation in regard with programme broadcast and the methods of serving the local community. Also, the stations have submitted confirmations from International organisations, SFOR, domestic and foreign institutions, associations, non-government organisations, as well as from political parties on cooperation with stations. It has been noticed that very small number of stations has ordered audience research on its programme rating from relevant agencies. 4. Production and on-air presentation quality (again this is not technical quality, but a production quality: Production and quality of the broadcast programme actually depends on financial situation of each station, as well as on technical and personnel requirements for quality production and for its realisation. Common for both FBiH and RS is that production and presentation quality are at the higher level in the public stations that had high-quality and well rated programmes before the war, and also in private stations being able to provide enough funds with its programme conception and advertising services, and after that investing such funds into equipment and additional education of its staff, which allowed them to, by doing so, increase extent of production and the programme presentation quality. Additionally, regarding FBiH the production and programme presentation of cantonal public stations have relatively high quality level. 5. Overall level of skill and experience of programme management: Regarding public broadcasters, programme staff level of skills and experience is different from case to case; hence, it is rather difficult to provide more in-depth cross-cutting comparison and conclusion. Most of private qualifying stations have relatively experienced programme staff, and majority of them gain the experience in their base stations during years of work, and also having additional education by taking journalist courses organised in BiH by foreign and domestic institutions in the last couple of years.
1. Overall skill and managerial ability: For evaluation in accordance to the above mentioned criteria following indicators were taken: - Achieved profit margin
- Return on capital employed On the basis of submitted financial reports, it was seen that the profit margin was extremely low, with an exception of small number of broadcasters who achieved net profit margin over 10%. As to the achieved results of business, by reviewing submitted documentation, it was noted that the greatest losses for the largest number of stations were made during the year 2000, while in the year 2001, there was a tendency of financial effects improvements in business. 2. Capitalization: Capitalization as a direct consequence of managerial ability in running business, which expresses accountancy value of the broadcasters. Depending on the achieved financial effects of business, income and loss, and business policy that refer to their deployment, influences the value of the company and determines its position at the market. Accumulation of the income was noticed at a certain number of stations and plans for its investment in some future time. On the other side, great number of stations, especially from the public sector is not in the positions to find means to cover the losses and accumulate it on owner's equity, with which they substantially devalue the overall value of the company. 3. Demonstrated marketing skills and usage of information on the public gained by research: Most broadcasters did not dedicate enough attention to the research of public opinion on their programme. Part of the surveys were made by marketing agencies, while in certain number of stations, there has been conducted a phone survey about popularity of a certain station on the area is covers. Besides this, most of the stations did not make necessary internal or external market analyses, and, with that, neglected the presence of competitor broadcasters in the market. These factors indicate the failures the stations made during planning of their activities in the upcoming period. Considering present macroeconomic situation difficulties of financial nature, fluctuating on the market, undeveloped system institutions, the submitted plans are largely with no real basis for their implementation. 4. Quality of managing finances in order to secure providing of services in the future: Ability of a subject to fulfil taken liabilities is a condition for existence of certain legal subject. For this reason, great attention was dedicated to the analysis of liquidity and solvency. As a consequence of the situation in the local economy, great number of non-liquid companies was noticed. Apart from this, there has been noticed a destimulating role of the banking sector, with high credit rates on long-term credits, so most of broadcasters do not have long-term liabilities, but they base their business on short-term resources. Also, as a consequence of business results, significant number of broadcasters, especially those from public sector, is not in the position to guarantee implementation of taken liabilities, not even by owner's equity. 5. Potential of market for proposed area of services: On the basis of entire documentation that was submitted, factors evaluated included: financial indicators of business, analysis of the current situation in the market, planning of fluctuation on the market, developed network of business relationship with clients, ability of stations to determine their position at the market. Majority of broadcasters, mostly public, failed to provide answers to the aforementioned criteria, which is taken to represent a lack of managerial skills in determination of strategic position in the market and planning future activities in it.
1. Proficiency of the personnel, their experience and policy of equipment maintenance: This criteria has been satisfied in the percentage of 62 % of stations. Average education of the personnel comprises of technical high-school degree, with the lack of university-level educated staff, which further leads to the conclusion of technical and technological development being a rather neglected category. Considering the fact that most of the stations work for a few years by now, it can be concluded that technical staff has satisfactory practical experience in required field in most cases. Most of the stations do not have employees working exclusively on the maintenance and also most of stations do not have the appropriate instruments for maintenance of the equipment. Instead, the stations make agreements with relevant service providers, specialized for maintenance of studio and emission equipment. 2. Configuration of studio equipment, equipment for signal transmission, equipment for broadcast, including equipment for preparation, supervision and broadcast of programme: This category has been satisfied by 59%. Most of stations use relevant studio equipment, while it has been noted that there is generally much lower level of quality of equipment for transmission of signal. It is noted that few stations maintain spare equipment and reliability of technical operations. It is also noticed that the technical base is of a conservative form, which means that none of the stations use systems of automatisation, which is already applied in the world. Those stations trying to use systems to broadcast programme by computers use programme packages with no licence or packages not intended to be used for professional practice (shareware or freeware) and unsuitable hardware (the cheapest audio cards), found mostly in the phase of experiment. 3. Signal control criteria: This criteria has been satisfied with the percentage of 42%. Stations mostly submitted false explanations as to assets they use for signal control and applicable control methods. It can be seen from this that stations do not pay much attention to supervision of the broadcast signal, which then results in the occurrence of frequent interferences. This area shows the need for introduction of strict control of the emission parameters, which is seen to bring the change to this situation. b) Non-qualification Unfortunately, 75 stations or 29 % did not qualify for the Licence. It should be noted that 12 stations[9] have qualified in some, while not qualifying in other regions. These stations have, for the purpose of general statistical data been counted in the number of qualified stations, since they will not be ceasing their broadcasting operations. However, the detailed analysis which follows will take these stations into account in respect to regions they applied for. Denying broadcasting licences in these cases was neither simple nor easy. The CRA is keenly aware of the gravity and impact of the decisions made, particularly for stations discontinuing operations. Thus, it is necessary to stress that result are the outcome of a complex and objective process of issuing of licences, which also presupposes rejection of those that cannot fulfil conditions and requirement. At the very beginning of this process, most particularly in Tuzla region, a serious lack of serious approach to the application process itself by several broadcasters was noted. This was seen in omissions in submitted application forms and material. For the next region (Brcko), this occurrence has also been visible, although not at the level as seen in the first region, while, later on, the approach by the broadcasters to the application process has improved. The CRA has, by repeatedly contacting the broadcasters for more material and information, tried to remedy these omissions in application submissions. In total, there have been 20 stations that did not qualify due to failure to achieve necessary minimum of points in all three categories. For Tuzla region, this combination of all three categories was seen as the predominant factor for non-qualification. However, for most of the regions, visible diversity of factors decisive for non-qualification is very much noticed. It could be noted that the failure in necessary finances usually, but surely not in all cases, lead to rather low or insufficient level of technical satisfaction, due to station’s non-ability to acquire and maintain the equipment. There has been one region in which the only two stations that did not qualify for the Licence have been found to have not met even the minimum level of programme content requirements. This was the case with two public stations, which failed to comply with the rules for public station’s programme, i.e. the criteria set out in the CRA Rule 01/1999: “Definition and Obligations of Public Broadcasters”. In three regions of Tuzla, Brcko and Doboj, there were cases of stations failing due to negative points for prior violations only. Kotor Varos has been noted as the first region which has seen no non-qualification due to negative points for prior violations. Regions, such as Sarajevo, Banja Luka, Gorazde, Livno and Bihac noted predominant factors for non-qualification in terms of insufficient level of financial requirements. This occurrence, unfortunately, shows general low-level of economic development in BiH and the available market-share for broadcasting operations. This is especially considered to be the case when we take into account that some of the stations in most market-attractive areas (such as urban areas of Sarajevo and Banja Luka) show failure in this segment of operations. Inevitably, financial inability leads to, in most cases, to problems of ensuring sufficient level of programme content obligations (for public stations) and requirements, as well as, or even more so, the technical requirements. Finally, when it comes to abidance to decisions on non-qualification, it is important to note that most of these broadcasters have closed down their operations. As of now, exeptions are found in cases of two stations[10], while for one more station[11], the check-up on two sites in Doboj and Gorazde regions is required. Also, the CRA has had to physically enforce the close-down decisions for three stations[12], by switching off the transmitter and placing the official CRA stamp on it. The bases for the CRA’s implementations of its decisions are found in the following: Article 3 of the High Representative’s Decision on Combining Competencies of the Independent Media Commission and Telecommunication Regulatory Agency, from 2 March 2002, states: “Enforcement Measures In securing compliance with CRA codes of practice, rules, regulations and decisions, the CRA shall have the authority to impose such enforcement measures as shall be in accordance with European regulatory practices.” In addition, the High Representative’s Decision of 11 June 1998, by which the IMC was established, in the Article 6, inter alia, provided: “The Independent Media Commission may enlist the support and assistance of all law enforcement agencies in Bosnia and Herzegovina and will seek assistance from the Peace Stabilization Force or its successors.” The aforementioned decision was replaced by the decision on establishing the CRA, however, in accordance with the Article 6 (1) of the latter, the responsibilities and obligations ascribed to the IMC were transferred to the CRA: “Article 6" Precedence and Continuity 6.1 This Decision, subject to the constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, shall have precedence over all inconsistent laws, regulations and decisions or specific provisions thereof at all levels of government in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This Decision replaces the High Representative’s Decision on the establishment of the Independent Media Commission, issued 11 June 1998. The responsibilities and obligations ascribed therein to the IMC are hereby transferred to the CRA.” c) Qualification As for those stations that qualified, it is important to note that in two regions, Konjic and Mostar, all of the participating stations qualified for the Licence. In addition, in the region of Livno, there has been only one station which did not qualify[13]. Results of qualification are as follows: Mostar 100 %, Konjic 100 %, Livno 94 %, Bugojno 90 %, Sarajevo 89 %, Trebinje 88 %, Kotor Varos 85 %, Bihac 76 %, Doboj 73 %, Banja Luka 72 %, Brcko 68 %, Gorazde63 % and Tuzla 52 %. Lowest level of successfully qualified stations is noted in Tuzla region, where, as has been stated, many broadcasters did not approach the application process itself too seriously, which was tried, to the extend possible, to be remedied by the CRA repeated and continued contacts to these stations. Generally, the points which were scored by qualified stations reflect a great diversity in level of requirement satisfactions. What could be noted is that, in most regions, lowest level of points scored is found in the financial aspect of operations. Reoccurring trends of general low level of economy is seen, although, it should be noted that this is seen less in bigger urban areas, compared to other smaller urban or rural parts of the country. Still, even in larger urban areas, there is noted lack of financial viability by broadcasters, as seen from the analysis for not qualified stations. Region by region, programme content and technical requirements seem to follow each other in their diversity and level of satisfaction, in terms of points scored. In some regions, still, the biggest diversity of points scored is seen in the programme content aspect. Where the financial situation is overall seen to be better of, i.e. bigger urban areas which attract most of the available resources, it can be seen that the production and transmission of programmes is on the higher level. d) Appellate procedure The implementation process included the appeal process, according to which all broadcasters have a right to appeal on a denial of licence, to the CRA Council, within 14 days of the reception of decision/denial. This report also closely examines the rulings upon appeals. The CRA Council has conveyed 5 meetings, on 13 March, 2001, 7 June, 2001, 30 October, 2001, 6 & 7 December, 2001, and 10 & 11 March, 2002, during which it has deliberated and decided upon the appeals on the CRA decisions in regard to issuance of long-term licences. Overall, there have been 62 stations that were granted the Licence in the appellate procedure, i.e. 34 % of stations that have qualified for the Licence. Also, calculating the appellate results by each particular region[14], statistics on the Council granting the Licences is as follows: Tuzla 10; Brcko 4; Doboj 8; Kotor Varos 5; Sarajevo 13; Banja Luka 9; Bugojno 7; Konjic 5; Gorazde 6; Trebinje 3; Mostar 6; Livno 4; Bihac 9. The Council carefully examined all arguments put forward in the appeals. It is important to note that the Council in no case wants to hinder the further development of free media – on the contrary, the members of the Council understand their work as a contribution to free and fair media, which will help to secure a peaceful society for all citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Out of the number of stations that did not qualify for long term broadcasting licence, there were 10 of them whose status remained unchanged even after Council raised number of their points on the basis of provided evidence by the station. 6 of the mentioned 10 stations were raised number of points in the financial viability segment, three in technical operations and two in programme quality. One station[15], apart from fulfilling requirements in the segment of technical operations and programme quality and also being raised number of points in financial viability segment, did not qualify for the Licence in Tuzla, Brcko and Doboj regions, due to great number of negative points. In regions which were evaluated and assessed afterwards, this station has, upon submission of new evidence, granted the number of points in other categories, sufficient enough to receive the Licence. 39 stations that did not qualify did not submit appeals to the CRA Council, out of the original number of 125 non-qualified stations. That means that only 31 % of stations which originally received non-qualification decisions from the CRA did not use this remedy. By regions, the statistics in percentages, show:
In 9 out of 13 regions, this remedy has been used 100 %, with the reminder of regions using them in a high percentage, as well. These numbers show that the use of the second-instance legal remedy, which is embodied in the CRA structure, has been extensively used. This also shows that this mechanism has proven to be effective and beneficial for the great number of stations (as the numbers from above illustrate.) e) Concluding remarks The chart below shows the overall statistic on the results of the process:
Considering specific media situation in BiH, as mentioned previously, the competitive based approach to issuance of the Licences proved to be the one of the best applicable ones, as analysis indicate. This especially relates to the specific factors taking place in this country, such as a large number of broadcasting stations in BiH and a very low level of economic development. Throughout this process, there have been many pressures attempting to influence the outcomes of the results; however the CRA has resisted such pressures, concluding the licencing process following the rules which were set up in a full consultation with all interested parties and in an entirely fair and transparent way. Such endeavours and successful pioneering process of competitive-based issuance of broadcasting licences have been highly praised and supported by different international and national institutions and organizations, including the European Platform of Regulatory Authorities, at its meeting in April of 2001, held in Barcelona. IV. Tuzla region Implementation of the Rule was first applied in Tuzla region, where Competition process for the Licences commenced on 16 November 2000, while the CRA announced the results for this region on 6 February, 2001. 60 stations, out of which 19 TV and 41 radio stations took part in the competition process, with one station withdrawing from competition in this region[16]. List of pre-coordinated frequencies for Tuzla region are found in Annex 5, while a listing of qualifying and not qualifying stations can be found in Annex 6. Results for Tuzla region are: QUALIFIED: 31 = 52 % NON-QUALIFIED: 29 = 48 % TV: 7 = 3 private + 4 public TV: 12 = 8 private + 4 public Radio: 24 = 15 private + 9 public Radio: 17 = 11 private + 6 public As for the Licence for regional coverage in Tuzla region, 3 TV stations and 6 radio stations applied for this type of coverage. Out of available 2 TV and 2 radio regional networks in Tuzla region, 1 TV and 2 radio stations qualified for it. Unfortunately, 29 did not qualify for the Licence in Tuzla Region. 16 stations were denied licences due to failure to achieve necessary minimum requirements, but have continued competing for licences in other regions. Remaining 14 stations that were denied a licence have not applied for broadcast licences anywhere else. For these 14 stations that applied for Tuzla Region only, this meant termination of their operations. All these stations, except one[17] have adhered to the CRA Decisions, i.e. terminated their broadcasting operations. The following data shows particular categories by which these 29 stations did not qualify for the Licence in this region:
As can be seen from the aforementioned statistics, most of stations (25 %) failed to achieve necessary minimum points in all three categories. Percentage of other categories which were decisive in reaching decisions on non-qualification is quite diverse and includes not only individual categories, but the combination of them, too. It is also noted that there was one station[18] that, in this region, failed due to a large number of prior violations. Hence, it can be concluded that there has been a general trend of low-level of requirement satisfactions in this region. As one of the reasons for this occurrence, a noted lack of serious approach to the application process itself by several broadcasters could be noted. This is noticeable in terms of substantial omissions in submitted application forms and material. As far as possible, the CRA rectified this by repeatedly contacting the stations for either clarifications or more material. When all of these categories are counted separately, taking into account how many times does each of them occur individually, then it can be noted that the most occurring category is that of financial requirements failure and it has been found that the necessary minimum has not been achieved 18 times, followed by 16 cases of failure to achieve necessary minimum in technical requirements and programme content. The Council granted licences to 11 stations upon the submitted appeal. 4 stations did not submit appeals. Hence, 86 % of not qualified stations used this second-instance legal remedy, while 35 % of qualified stations in this region were awarded the Licence in the appellate procedure. It should also be noted that the CRA Council has issued decisions for region Tuzla in regard to Radio postaja Zepce and RTV Zivinice (TV), in terms of allowing the stations to continue operating based on the CRA previously issued provisional licences, for the period of three months, during which stations have had to provide additional financial information. Based on this new information, CRA Council has, at the expiration of these three months, made a final decision, in terms of non-qualification for RTV Zivinice, while Radio postaja Zepce has, upon receipt of new financial records, qualified in the region of Kotor Varos. Finally, CRA Council issued decisions for Radio Banovici and RTV Zavidovici (radio), in terms of granting their operations on AM frequencies, while the CRA decisions of denial of licences on FM frequencies were upheld. Operations on AM frequencies of these stations will continue based on the conditions of the provisional licences, until CRA informs these stations on the procedures of applying for long-term licences for AM frequencies. As for 31 qualified stations (this list includes both the stations that have qualified in the first part of assessment and evaluation and upon CRA Council ruling), data shows that the points scored, in general, reflect the diversity in level of requirements satisfaction. In detail, in programme content, there were 7 stations that were awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 3 stations received a minimum of 12 points; in financial requirements 2 stations were awarded 9 points (maximum in this region), while 22 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and in technical requirements, there are 2 stations were awarded 9.5 points, while 9 stations received a minimum of 6 points. Diagram below show the distribution of points, i.e. diversity in the level of meeting the set requirements. From this, it is noticeable that the lowest level of compliance with the CRA requirements for awarding a licence was found in the compliance with the financial requirements, not only from the aspect of most stations achieving a necessary minimum for qualification, but also in the fact that the stations which qualified have a rather low level of general financial viability. As for the technical operations requirements, 2 stations achieved 9.5 points, which is considered a maximum in this region. As for the minimum points achieved in this category, larger number of stations is determined to satisfy the bare minimum. From the aspect of programme content requirements, there is noted a bigger number of stations with higher number of points, compared to only 3 stations receiving a bare minimum. This trend shows a relatively high degree of programme content requirements and production here being met.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
V. Brcko region The next region where the Rule was applied was in Brcko region, where Competition process for the Licences commenced on 22 January 2001. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in this region have been announced on 4 May, 2001. List of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region is found in Annex 7 and complete listing of results for this region is found in Annex 8. 47 stations – 14 TV and 33 radio stations took part in the competition process, while the results are as follows: QUALIFIED: 32 = 68 % NON- QUALIFIED: 15 = 32 % TV: 8 = 7 private + 1 public TV: 6 = 3 private + 3 public Radio: 24 = 19 private + 5 public Radio: 9 = 6 private + 3 public Unfortunately, 15 stations did not qualify for the Licence in this region. 10 stations were denied licences due to failure to achieve necessary minimum requirements but have continued competing for licences in other regions. Remaining 5 stations that were denied a licence have not applied anywhere else, hence, received a decision on non-qualification and all abided by it, exept one station[19]. The following data shows the categories of non- qualification in this region:
In this region, the CRA has seen a slightly improved approach to the application process itself by several broadcasters. Still, substantial omissions in submitted application forms and material have been noted, and the CRA continuously gave efforts again to rectify this. Failures in financial and technical requirements are close to each other, and mark two most decisive categories for non-qualification, while the programme content requirements were found to be third category on the list, with again one station[20] failing to achieve a necessary minimum in this region, due to a large number of negative points. The Council granted licences to 4 stations upon the submitted appeal, while 1 station did not submit an appeal. 12.5 % stations, out of the total number of qualified ones were granted the Licence in the appellate procedure, which, the data shows, was used in the percentage of 93 % in this region. As for 32 qualified stations, it is seen that: in programme content, 4 stations were awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 7 stations received a minimum of 12 points; in financial requirements, 2 stations were awarded 9 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 17 stations received a minimum of 6 points; while in technical requirements, there are 3 stations that were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 10 stations received a minimum of 6 points. Quite similar to the results in Tuzla region, it is noted in Brcko region that the lowest level of compliance with the CRA requirements for awarding a licence was in the compliance with the financial requirements, too, with again not much deviation in results. As for programme content, a slightly lower level of grades is noted here, when compared to the results from previous region, while the technical abilities remain almost the same. Programme content requirements mark again the most segregated category in terms of scores achieved.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
VI. Doboj region Stations competing in Doboj region were next assessed and evaluated, where Competition process for the Licences commenced on 26 February 2001. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in this region have been announced on 28 June, 2001[21]. 63 RTV stations - 15 TV and 48 radio stations took part in the competition process. The results are: QUALIFIED: 46 = 73 % NON-QUALIFIED: 17 = 27 % TV: 10 = 9 private + 1 public TV: 5 = 2 private + 3 public Radio: 36 = 21 private + 15 public Radio: 12 = 5 private + 7 public It should be noted that one station in this region (note footone 8 for detailes)[22] received long-term licence prior to the commencement of this process, and did not participate in the competition; hence, was not counted in the number of qualified stations in this region. Unfortunately, 17 stations did not qualify for the Licence. 11 stations were denied licences, but have competing for licences in other regions. For remaining 6 stations, they abided by decisions on termination of their operations (except two, one, as refered to on page 28, and second – Radio Drina Skelani,for which it is expected to be checked). The following data shows the requirements in particular categories by which these 17 stations did not qualify for the Licence in this particular region:
In this region, the CRA has seen a slightly improved approach to the application process itself. Diversity of categories decisive for non-qualification is present here, too, with the financial requirements marking the one most often found, either as a sole decisive factor, or in combination with others. Programme content and technical requirements again are numerically close to each other, with two stations additionally failing due to prior violations for this region, too. All stations which did not qualify with the CRA decisions have submitted appeals, and the CRA Council granted licences to 8 stations upon the submitted appeals and the new evidence presented by stations. 17 % of qualified stations were granted the Licence in the appellate procedure, which was exhausted 100 % here. As for 46 qualified stations, in programme content, there were 6 stations awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 7 stations received a minimum of 12 points; in financial requirements: 2 stations were awarded 9 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 30 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and, for technical requirements, 6 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 10 stations received a minimum of 6 points. There has been noted a small increase in satisfaction of technical requirements, with larger number of stations receiving higher scores in this segment. Programme content is surely repeatedly the most diverse one in terms of scores achieved, showing the wide spectrum within the qualified programmes. However, the financial requirement satisfaction remains the lowest in this region, too.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
VII. Kotor Varos region As has been mentioned previously, the CRA has, after the assessments and evaluation for the three aforementioned regions reached a decision to change the way the applications were sent for this process. After Doboj region, all applicants were publicly called to submit applications for all remaining 10 regions simultaneously on 29 May, 2001. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Kotor Varos region have been announced on 18 July, 2001. List of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region are found in Annex 11, while the complete results are listed in Annex 12. 26 stations took part in the competition process, while one station[23] withdrew its application for Kotor Varos. The results are: QUALIFIED: 22 = 85 % NON-QUALIFIED: 4 = 15 % TV: 6 = 5 private + 1 public Radio: 16 = 11 private + 5 public Radio: 4 = 1 private + 3 public It should be noted that one of these qualified stations, ATV Banja Luka has been awarded the Licence prior to the competition process, but has competed for additional coverage in this and other regions; hence has been counted in the data. Out of 4 not qualified stations, one station applied only in this region, and abided by the decision on termination of operations. The following data shows the categories by which these 5 stations did not qualify for the Licence:
As seen, there is an equal distribution among the categories that were decisive for non-qualification. What is important to note is that this is the first region (after previous three) where there has been no cases of stations non-qualifying due to prior violations solely. The CRA Council granted the Licence to 2 stations upon the submitted appeal, hence, 9 % of qualified stations passed in the appellate process. Also, this region has shown that this second-instance legal remedy has been used 100 % by stations which did not qualify. As for 22 qualified stations, the score data notes that in programme content, 4 stations were awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 5 stations received a minimum of 12 points; in financial requirements, 1 station was awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 10 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and in technical requirements: 4 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 3 stations received a minimum of 6 points. Very much similar to other regions, there has also been seen a trend of diversification within each category, but what can be noted in particular is a slight increase in scores from the financial evaluations and assessments. The programme content and technical aspect are again most diverse and segmented in the number of points scored.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
VIII. Sarajevo region This region also falls under the changed approach to applying, in terms of submission applications for all remaining 10 regions simultaneously. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Sarajevo region have been announced on 22 August, 2001. List of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region, together with the complete listing of the results are found in Annex 13 and Annex 14 respectively. 73 stations took part in the competition process. Two stations[24] received long-term licences prior to this competition, while one station[25] withdrew its application for this region and one station[26] received a decision on termination of their licence with the Director General Decision from 10 January, 2000. None of these stations has been calculated for this region. The results are: QUALIFIED: 65 = 89 % NON-QUALIFIED: 8 = 11 % TV: 19 = 13 private + 6 public TV: 1 private Radio: 46 = 31 private + 15 public Radio: 7 = 3 private + 4 public
8 non-qualifying stations did not meet the requirements in the following categories:
As seen in other regions, too, the predominant factor for non-qualification has been the financial requirement of stations, which led to either poor programme content quality and/or lack of equipment and its maintenance. The CRA Council granted licences to 12 stations upon the submitted appeal, hence, data shows that 19 % of stations in Sarajevo region received the Licence using the second-instance legal remedy. All except one station submitted appeals to the Council, i.e. 87.5 % of stations in this region used this remedy. As for 65 qualified stations, data which can be noted shows that in programme content: 2 stations were awarded 20 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 17 stations received a minimum of 12 points; in financial requirements: 1 station was awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 40 stations received a minimum of 6 points; in technical requirements: 6 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 10 stations received a minimum of 6 points. What needs to be taken into account is a great number of stations participating in the competition process in Sarajevo region. In this region, there has been seen an increased level of meeting the requirements in all categories, and particularly in programme content, where this is the first region in which the stations (two of them) were awarded maximum number of points. This category (as can be seen from the diagram below) is also one of the most diversified in terms of points scored in all of the regions. Similar situation has been noted in the technical part, but the financial requirements satisfaction remains on the low level. These statistics show two important things: that the quality of production and transmission of programmes seems to be on the higher level in larger urban areas, where the market share and advertisement revenues are higher then elsewhere, but it also shows that the general extremely low-level of economics in BiH is strongly visible in areas which do attract most of the available resources.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
IX. Banja Luka region Public announcement for this region, too went out simultaneously for 10 regions (excluding the first three, as stated) on 29 May, 2001. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Banja Luka region have been announced on 15 October, 2001, together with the results from Bugojno and Konjic regions (analyzed later in the report.) List of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region are found in Annex 15, while the list of stations is in Annex 16. 55 stations took part in the competition process. Two stations[28] received long-term licences prior to this competition, but one of them (ATV Banja Luka) has competed in this and other regions for additional coverage; hence, this stations has been included in calculation. In addition, 6 stations withdrew their applications for this region[29] and have not been included in the statistics. The results are as follows[30]: QUALIFIED: 40 = 72 % NON-QUALIFIED: 15 = 28 % TV: 11 = 10 private + 1 public TV: 3 = 1 private + 2 public Radio: 29 = 21 private + 8 public Radio: 12 = 6 private + 6 public
Data for these 15 not qualified stations shows:
As seen in other regions, too, failure in financial requirement of stations is most present for non-qualification decisions, followed by or in combination with poor programme content quality and/or lack of equipment and its maintenance. All the stations that received the CRA decision on non-qualification submitted appeals (showing the 100 % usage of this legal remedy), while the CRA Council granted licences to 8 of these stations. Also, these numbers show that 20 % of qualified stations in Banja Luka region received the Licence in the appellate procedure. As for 40 qualified, in programme content: 2 stations was awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 4 stations received a minimum of 12 points; in financial requirements: 1 station was awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 25 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and in technical requirements: 4 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 10 stations received a minimum of 6 points. Here, programme content requirements are very diverse, too, with the scores in technical and financial requirements being more in great similarity with situation in other regions. Reoccurring trends in terms of general low level of economic situation is seen here, although, in smaller percentage then in other smaller urban areas.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
X. Bugojno Region For Bugojno region, all applicants were publicly called to submit applications on 29 May, 2001, as well. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Bugojno region have been announced on 15 October, 2001. Annex 17 contains the listing of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region, while Annex 18 includes the results listings. 30 stations took part in the competition process. One station received the decision on termination of its licence; hence did not take part in the competition (see full account on this on page 33). The results show: QUALIFIED: 27 = 90 % NON-QUALIFIED: 3 = 10 % TV: 6 = 5 private + 1 public Radio: 21 = 11 private + 10 public Radio: 3 = 1 private + 2 public
Data for the 3 non-qualified stations is:
For these three stations, three categories, excluding any case of station’s not qualification due to prior violations, two times there are categories of technical and financial requirements, with one programme content. All non-qualified stations submitted appeals (100 % usage of the appellate procedure), and the Council granted licences to 6 of them, i.e. 22 % of stations which have qualified in Bugojno region have received the Licence using the second-instance remedy. As for 27 qualified stations, programme content scores show 4 stations with awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 9 stations received a minimum of 12 points; financial requirements with 1 station was awarded 8.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 16 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and technical requirements with 2 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 4 stations received a minimum of 6 points. It can be noted that the scores in financial part are relatively lower then what was seen in previous regions, since the highest number of points scored does not exceed the mark of 8.5. In technical part, there seems to be a bit better scoring situation, while the programme content again remains the most diversified with shown relatively high level of quality requirements.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
XI. Konjic Region For this region, all applicants were publicly called to submit applications on 29 May, 2001. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Bugojno region have been announced on 15 October, 2001. List of pre-coordinated frequencies is attached in Annex 19, while the listing of results is in Annex 20. 17 stations – 5 TV (3 private and 2 public) and 12 radio stations (6 private and 6 public) took part in the competition process. One station received the decision on termination of its licence; hence did not participate in the competition (see page 33). This is the first assessed and evaluated region in which all the stations qualified for the Licence. 4 stations, which have first received the CRA decision on non-qualification were granted the Licence in the appellate procedure by the CRA Council. This 100 % usage of second-instance remedy led to 24 % of those which qualified to have done so though the appellate process. Results for these 17 stations note that in programme content, 1 station was awarded 20 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 4 stations received a minimum of 12 points; in financial requirements: 1 station was awarded 9 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 10 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and in technical requirements: 2 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 1 station received a minimum of 6 points. This region, after Sarajevo, notes a maximum score in programme content of one station, with continued diversity of scores for all other qualified stations. Also, in financial requirements scores, it can be noted that only one station satisfied the bare minimum required for qualification, showing a somewhat improved financial situation of the stations in Konjic region, compared to other. Similar outlook is found in the technical requirement satisfactions. One of the reasons for this could, perhaps, be found, in a relatively small number of operating stations there, in terms of satisfaction of the market availabilities.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
XII. Gorazde Region For Gorazde region, all applicants were publicly called to submit applications on 29 May, 2001, as well. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Gorazde region have been announced on 5 December, 2001. Annex 21 contains the listing of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region, while Annex 22 includes the results listings. 41 stations took part in the competition process. One station withdrew its application in this region[32]. The results show: QUALIFIED: 26 = 63 % NON-QUALIFIED: 15 = 37 % TV: 8 = 5 private + 3 public TV: 2 = 1 private + 1 public Radio: 18 = 12 private + 6 public Radio: 13 = 3 private + 10 public
Data for the 15 non-qualified stations is:
For these stations, there are also no stations failing due to prior violations only. Biggest source of non-qualification is the category of financial requirements, as can be seen by this category present as the one with highest number of cases where it was the sole reason of non-qualification, as well as in combination with the technical requirements. Failure in programme content comes here as the last, with the smallest number of cases. It could be noted that the failure in necessary finances usually, but surely not in all cases, lead to rather low or insufficient level of technical satisfaction, due to station’s non-ability to acquire and maintain the equipment. The Council granted licences to 5 stations upon the submitted appeal, i.e. 19 % of qualified stations passed using the appellate procedure. Out of those non-qualified, one station did not submit any appeal, which shows that this remedy has been, in Gorazde region, used 93 %. As for 26 qualified stations, programme content scores show 4 stations with awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 4 stations received a minimum of 12 points; financial requirements with 1 station was awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 13 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and technical requirements with 5 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 6 stations received a minimum of 6 points. It can be noted that the scores in technical part are relatively higher then what was seen in previous regions, since the highest number of points scored includes 5 stations. Programme content again is the most diversified, with shown relatively lower level of quality requirements and the financial part is quite similar to the average seen elsewhere.
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
XIII. Trebinje Region For this region, all applicants were publicly called to submit applications on 29 May, 2001, as wsell. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Trebinje region have been announced on 19 December, 2001. Annex 23 contains the listing of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region, while Annex 24 includes the results listings. 17 stations took part in the competition process. The results show: QUALIFIED: 15 = 88 % NON-QUALIFIED: 2 = 12 % TV: 5 = 4 private + 1 public TV: 1 public Radio: 10 = 5 private + 5 public Radio: 1 public Here, 2 stations did not qualify for the Licence in this region, which have applied only in this region, and abided by decisions on termination of broadcasting operations. Data for these 2 stations show that the only category decisive for non-qualification has been insufficient scores in programme content requirements, where the stations did not satisfy even the bare minimum of requirements for public stations. 100 % usage of second-instance legal remedy has been exercised by all stations which received the CRA decisions on non-qualifications, while the Council granted licences to 4 stations upon the submitted appeal. This means that 27 % of those qualified have received the Licence using the appellate procedure. As for 15 qualified stations, programme content scores show 2 stations with awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 2 stations received a minimum of 12 points; financial requirements with 1 station was awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 6 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and technical requirements with 4 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 2 stations received a minimum of 6 points. It can be noted that the stations showed relatively high level of compliance with the technical requirements, but that for the two other categories, the points scored are quite low in general.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
XIV. Mostar Region For this region, all applicants were publicly called to submit applications on 29 May, 2001. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Mostar region have been announced also on 19 December, 2001. List of pre-coordinated frequencies is attached in Annex 25, while the listing of results is in Annex 26. 22 stations – 4 TV (3 private and 1 public) and 18 radio stations (9 private and 9 public) took part in the competition process. One station received the decision on termination of its licence; hence did not participate in the competition (see page 33). Also, two stations[34] withdrew their applications for this region. This is the second assessed and evaluated region in which all the stations qualified for the Licence, after Konjic. All stations that originally received the decision on non-qualification by the CRA appealed (100 % usage of this legal remedy) and 6 stations were granted the Licence in this procedure by the CRA Council. 27 % of total number of qualified stations has qualified though the appellate procedure. Results for these 22 stations note that in programme content, 2 stations were awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 2 stations received a minimum of 12 points; in financial requirements: 1 station was awarded 9 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 11 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and in technical requirements: 4 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 5 stations received a minimum of 6 points. Great diversity in programme content achievements is also present here, with the financial requirements scores being very similar to other regions, showing the presented overall situation in this aspect. Technical requirements are also seen to be quite similar to outlooks in other regions.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
XV. Livno Region For this region, all applicants were publicly called to submit applications on 29 May, 2001, as well. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in Livno region have been announced on 19 December, 2001, same as for results for Trebinje and Mostar regions. Annex 27 contains the listing of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region, while Annex 28 includes the results listings. 17 stations took part in the competition process. One station received the decision on termination of its licence; hence did not participate in the competition (see page 33). Also, two stations[35] withdrew their applications for this region. The results show: QUALIFIED: 16 = 94 % NON-QUALIFIED: 1 = 6 % TV: 3 = 2 private + 1 public Radio: 13 = 5 private + 8 public Radio: 1 private Here, only 1 station did not qualify for the Licence in this region. For this station, this was not the domicile region, but the one they applied for additional coverage. It has not qualified for the Licence, due to insufficient level in financial requirements. 5 originally non-qualified stations by the CRA decisions appealed (100 % ), while the Council granted licences to 4 stations upon the submitted appeal. 31 % of total number of qualified stations received the Licence through the usage of appellate procedure. As for 16 qualified stations, programme content scores show 2 stations with awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 2 stations received a minimum of 12 points; financial requirements with 2 stations was awarded 8.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 8 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and technical requirements with 3 stations were awarded 9 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 1 station received 6 points. Here, it is noted that the level of financial requirements being met is rather low, with no stations receiving grades higher then 8.5. programme content and technical requirements are in average calculation, similar to other regions.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
XVI. Bihac Region For Bihac region, all applicants were publicly called to submit applications on 29 May, 2001, as well. The results of the CRA decisions for the stations in this region have been announced on 28 December, 2001. Annex 29 contains the listing of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region, while Annex 30 includes the results listings. 25 stations took part in the competition process. Out of two stations that did not participate in the competition process for this region, one station withdrew its application in this region, same as for Mostar region (see page 52)[36], while the other (see page 33) received a decision on termination of provisional licence. The results show[37]: QUALIFIED: 19 = 76 % NON-QUALIFIED: 6 = 24 % TV: 5 = 3 private + 2 public TV: 1 private Radio: 14 = 5 private + 9 public Radio: 5 = 1 private + 4 public
Data for the 6 non-qualified stations is:
For these stations, biggest source of non-qualification, again, is the category of financial requirements, as can be seen by this category present as the one with highest number of cases where it was the sole reason of non-qualification, as well as in combination with the technical and programme content requirements. Failure in the two later categories comes here as the last, with the smallest number of cases. As noted in other regions, failure in necessary finances seems to be biggest problem for most of non-qualified broadcasters, reflecting the general low level of economy and the available market-share in broadcasting. All (100 %) of non-qualified station by the CRA decisions appealed, and the Council granted licences to 9 stations. Out of 19 qualified in the final count, 47 % have qualified with the appellate procedure. As for 19 qualified stations, programme content scores show 2 stations with awarded 19 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 3 stations received 13 points (taken as a minimum in this category for Bihac region); financial requirements with 1 station was awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 7 stations received a minimum of 6 points; and technical requirements with 4 stations were awarded 9.5 points, taken as a maximum in this group of stations, while 3 stations received a minimum of 6 points. It can be noted that the scores in technical part are relatively high, as noted in several other regions, while in programme content, again being the most diversified, it can be noted that there is no station which received only a bare minimum of 12 points, but the minimum was taken to be 13 points. The financial part is quite similar to the average seen elsewhere.
Programme content requirements:
Financial requirements:
Technical requirements:
Annex 1
Annex 2 CRA LICENSING LETTER L-15 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FOR CRA LICENSING PHASE 2 – COMPETITION RULE As you are already aware, your application for Long-Term Licence is currently in the process of consideration by the CRA. The CRA has today issued a Decision announcing that the region in which you wish to broadcast, ( name ) region is as of the date of the Decision subject to the CRA Rule on Competitive Process for the Award of Long-Term Licences. With this in mind the CRA hereby requires that you provide additional information in support of your application as outlined below in a series of questions. In order to consider your application, we need you to submit as much information and detail as possible on the following: STAFF AND PROGRAMMES Provide a short biography of any and all managing posts including, if applicable, the Director and Editor-in-Chief of your station and describe any relevant experience in the field of broadcasting. Draw up a staff chart showing station management and organizational structure. Provide a comprehensive justification for your broadcasting operations, including on what basis you believe that your station serves the community to which it broadcasts. Please pay special attention to diversity of programming, target audiences, news and information services and entertainment programmes. Submit broadcast material in standard audio (for radio) and/or video VHS (for television) tapes for any day during the week and one weekend day during the past 14 days (two days in total). Please mark the tapes with the date of recordings. In addition, provide a programme schedule for the past 14 days. FINANCE AND RESEARCH Submit a Business Plan (at least 2-year) explaining your station’s broadcast and related business activities. This should include information on the experience acquired so far in the operation of your station and a plan for how you will sustain the station’s operations in the future. Summarize your main assumptions underpinning your Business Plan – e.g. audience share, market research, advertising revenue and competition of other media in your area – and the objective basis for those assumptions. Balance Sheet and Income Statement for year 1999 and first six months of the year 2000, as well as recapitulation of salaries with names of employees for the same period. d) Cash-Flow Report for the first six months of year 2000. TECHNICAL OPERATION Explain clearly the handling of equipment, working coordination of the technical staff. Provide valid evidence on the relevant experience and education of your employed (bound by contract) technical staff and responsible manager. Please include their job description and, if applicable, their professional background in the field of technical operations in broadcasting. In case a third party is engaged on certain tasks (Contractor), it is also necessary to provide valid and relevant evidence on their experience and skills. Explain the strategy for maintenance of studio and transmission equipment in case you have a Contractor as a partner responsible for maintenance of transmission and/or studio equipment, please submit attached copy/copies of this/these contracts. Submit in the form of a diagram (example attached): studio equipment configuration, devices for signal feed and transmission equipment, accompanied by the list of technical equipment for broadcast preparation and monitoring. Provide material evidence or documentation (e.g. contract with owner) about any licences for your permitted use of any and all transmitter sites. If facilities are under your ownership, please present evidence of proof of ownership. e) Submit as list of studio equipment used for signal control. Explain the method used by the employed staff to control the signal in the studio and at the transmitter site. NOTE: It is obligatory for you to submit a list of towns and settlements that you wish to include in your service zone. Please be as comprehensive as possible when proving responses to the questions above. You must respond to all the questions and requests set out in this letter. Either the registered Director or Proprietor of the station must sign the response correspondence. It is essential to note that in case you expressed a wish to provide a regional service (i.e. cover more than 85% of certain area) and the CRA turns down your application for that level of service, your station will be considered and it will participate in the competition for a zone within that region. Broadcasters that are applying for coverage of their zone or location will be considered only in accordance with their current coverage. The official CRA Frequency Allocation Table for ( name ) region is included in Annex to the CRA Decision, which is attached to this letter. All existing broadcasters should announce their participation in the Competition Process in order to provide an opportunity to the public and other interested parties to give comments within the period of 30 days. Under the criteria laid down in the CRA Competition Rule 04/2000, we shall use this and other information previously provided in your application for a Long-Term Licence to evaluate your station and its future sustainability in the market. The CRA retains the right to deny issuance of the licence to any broadcaster that, according to the CRA, does not fully satisfy the CRA criteria presented in the Rule 04/2000. The receipt of application by the CRA does not signify a guaranteed right to obtain a Long-Term Broadcast Licence. Please note that your responses must be with the CRA (Sarajevo, Mostar or Banja Luka offices) no later than 14 days from date of this letter. Failure to comply with any of this or any other CRA requirements may render the application liable to disqualification. Annex 3 Technical information needed from broadcasting stations TECHNICAL OPERATIONS To explain clearly handling of the equipment, working coordination of technical staff. Please submit valid evidence on relevant experience and education of your employed (or a person under contract on engagement) technical operative staff and responsible technical manager. Please also attach their job descriptions and, if applicable, their professional experience in the field of broadcasting technical operations (with as much details as possible). In case that the third person or company has been engaged for certain tasks, it is necessary to submit copy of the contract and relevant evidence on their experience and capabilities.
One evaluates the responsible technical manager and three employees with the highest education degree according to the principle of prevailing education.
One evaluates the responsible technical manager and three employees with the best experience according to the principle of prevailing education. It should be emphasized that only the working experience in the same field, i.e. broadcasting, is being taken into consideration. If the broadcaster has a small number of employees, that fact is being taken into consideration too, as well as the situation in which the station has a bigger number of employees. Less employees means that the staff members are more loaded, which increases the possibility of technical omission in the programme. In case that the station has a relevant (one of the known ones) software that “airs” the programme, that fact is being taken into consideration too. Explain the strategy of studio and broadcasting equipment maintenance. If you have a partner under contract that is in charge of maintenance and/or studio equipment, please attach a copy/copies of the contract/contracts. In the following table, some of the most common cases have been given as an example. Other cases, which are a combination of the mentioned, are being evaluated through personal assessment by our engineers, based on the category to which those cases are close from the aspect of system reliability.
Please attach in the form of diagram (sample attached): configuration of studio equipment, signal feed devices and broadcasting equipment, and a list of technical equipment for preparation, control and broadcasting of programme. Due to the diversity of used equipment, which governs among the stations, evaluation is based on few crucial points, such as processing of signal (which prevents “expansion” of the station on neighbouring channels), redundancy (presence of the reserve in a chain and possibility that the station remains “on-air” if any of devices fails), general quality of used equipment (production and broadcasting equipment, having in mind that the quality of broadcasting equipment has a larger weight)
This paragraph is not being evaluated directly, it has influence on a decision on which station among those that obtain the licence will be allocated a certain site. The station that is the owner of certain site and made huge investments for its construction has a advantage (but by no means a decisive one) over the one that rents its sites. To submit a list of studio equipment used for signal control in the studio. Explain the method used by employees for signal control in the studio and on the transmitter. In this part the station is required to explain how and by which means it conducts signal control. For example, for radio stations: if the station has the instruments for subjective and objective measurement of signal level and phase, and the staff knows how to use it and it is doing it, one can presume that no signal distortion, loss of stereo picture, interference with neighbouring channels, etc, will occur. If the station owns such equipment, it obtains a half of point, and if the explanation about the way of work is also provided, the station receives a full point. We believe that this segment should be evaluated too, but we did not give significant importance to it, because the listeners (viewers) will avoid low technical quality programmes themselves.
Annex 4 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED RADIO STATIONS IN BiH
b) LIST OF QUALIFIED TV STATIONS IN BiH
e) LIST OF NOT QUALIFIED TV STATIONS IN BiH
Annex 5 LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR TUZLA REGION
Annex 6 [38] a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN TUZLA REGION
LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR BRCKO REGION
Annex 8 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN BRCKO REGION
Annex 9 LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR DOBOJ REGION
c) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN DOBOJ REGION
LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR KOTOR VAROS REGION
Annex 12 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN KOTOR VAROS REGION
LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR SARAJEVO REGION
Annex 14 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN SARAJEVO REGION
b) LIST OF NOT QUALIFIED STATIONS IN SARAJEVO REGION
LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR BANJA LUKA REGION
Annex 16 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN BANJA LUKA REGION
b) LIST OF NOT QUALIFIED STATIONS IN BANJA LUKA REGION
LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR BUGOJNO REGION
Annex 18 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN BUGOJNO REGION
b) LIST OF NOT QUALIFIED STATIONS IN BUGOJNO REGION
LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR KONJIC REGION
Annex 20 LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN KONJIC REGION
Annex 21 LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR GORAZDE REGION
Annex 22 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN GORAZDE REGION
b) LIST OF NOT QUALIFIED STATIONS IN GORAZDE REGION
Annex 23 LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR TREBINJE REGION
Annex 24 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN TREBINJE REGION
b)
Annex 25 LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR MOSTAR REGION
Annex 26 LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN MOSTAR REGION
Annex 27 LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR LIVNO REGION
Annex 28 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN LIVNO REGION
b) LIST OF NOT QUALIFIED STATIONS IN LIVNO REGION
Annex 29 LIST OF PRE-COORDINATED FREQUENCIES FOR BIHAC REGION
Annex 30 a) LIST OF QUALIFIED STATIONS IN BIHAC REGION
b) LIST OF NOT QUALIFIED STATIONS IN BIHAC REGION
[1] On 2 March 2001, the High Representative passed the Decision on Combining the Competencies of the Independent Media Commission and the Telecommunications Regulatory Agency, thus creating the Communications Regulatory Agency (CRA). Article 6.2 of the Decision states: "All acts, codes, rules, guidelines and decisions made by the IMC and the TRA shall remain in force unless replaced or amended by decisions made by the CRA." [2] ITU was created in 1865 and has 188 member states, which makes it one of the international bodies with the largest membership. The ITU rules are found in the form of the Constitution and Convention of the organisation, as well as detailed and voluminous Radio Regulations, which are published by the ITU publication office, Geneva. [3] List of pre-coordinated frequencies will be included in annex form for each region. It should be noted that these lists are, in the process of allocation, subject to expansion, as additional frequencies could be found available for allocation to qualified broadcasters. [4] Sample of such letter can be seen in Annex 2. [5] In particular, primarily involvement was that of the Broadcast and Frequency Spectrum Divisions, together with Finance Department. [6] Stations are: NRTV Studio 99, Hrvatska Radio Postaja Mostar, HTV Mostar, and Radio Srpsko Sarajevo. [7] List of qualified and not qualified stations in BiH can be found in Annex 4. [8] Remark: This number of stations includes one station that was awarded long-term licence before the beginning of the Phase II, but it also participated in the competition process. Out of this number, 14 applicants also submitted this request (10 radio stations (1 public and 9 private; in FBiH: 4 – 1 public and 3 private and in the RS: 6 – all private), and 4 TV stations (1 public and 3 private; in FBiH: 2 – 1 public and 1 private, in the RS: 2 private stations.) 248 stations that were issued a provisional broadcasting licence in the Phase I participated in the competition process for long-term licences. 19 stations did not apply. From this number, 4 stations (3 radio and 1 TV, all private, 1 in the RS and 3 in FBiH) were issued long-term licences before the competition begun. Not counting 4 above mentioned stations, 15 that did not submit the request includes 10 radio stations (2 public and 8 private; in FBiH: 6 private stations and in the RS: 4 – 2 public and 2 private), as well as 5 TV stations (1private and 4 public; in FBiH: 2 public and in the RS: 3 – 1 private and 2 public stations.) [9] NRTV Studio 99 (later withdrew from competition in regions apart from Sarajevo), NRTV Zetel, HRTV Herceg Bosna, Nezavisni Radio Banja Luka, RTV BN, NTV Studio Arena, Hrvatski Radio postaja Usora, Radio Bet Fratello, Radio Postaja Zepce, Radio Osvit, Radio Studio M, Radio Sloboda. [10] Radio Sucani (Tuzla region), and Radio 076 Muzicki (Brcko, Doboj and Gorazde regions). [11] Radio Drina Skelani. [12] Radio Beta (Sarajevo region) on 12 February, 2002, Radio Boston (Banja Luka region) on 28 February, 2002, and RTV Sveti Georgije (Banja Luka region) on 16 January, 2002. [13] For this station, the application was submitted for the additional coverage, not the principal, domicile broadcast operations [14] Note that the number for each region significantly exceeds the total number of stations which were granted the Licence in the appellate procedure, due to numerous stations applying for more than one region. [15] HRTV Herceg Bosna. [16] Station withdrawing its application for this region is NRTV Zetel – Radio City. [17] Radio Sucani [18] HRTV Herceg Bosna. [19] Radio 076 Muzicki (also dod not stop operating in Doboj region). [20] Same as in Tuzla region (page 21). [21] List of pre-coordinated frequencies for this region is found in Annex 9, while the list of results of the implementation of the Rule in this region is found in Annex 10. [22] NTV Amna. [23] NRTV Zetel – Radio City. [24] Radio M and TV X. [25] Radio Naba – Studio Vares. [26] RTV Livno was issued provisional licence on 8 November, 1999, but has not started operating on the allocated frequency within the set deadline, subsequently received an extension, but failed to meet it as well; hence, the provisional licence for that frequency of this station has been terminated. [27] Radio Beta, for which the CRA team endorsed the closing on 12 February, 2002. [28] ATV Banja Luka and Radio Studio 078. [29] Slobodni Radio Prijedor, Super Radio, Nezavisna RTV Prijedor (radio and TV), Srpski Radio Sanski Most, and TV Gvozden. [30] For ITC Kozarski Vijesnik, the final decision will be reached in September, 2002, by the CRA Council, for this and Bihac regions (now, this station is counted as not qualified). [31] Radio Boston (close-down on 28 February, 2002) and RTV Sveti Georgije (radio and TV – close-down on 16 January, 2002). [32] RTV Srebrenica. [33] In addition, for RTV Visegrad, it has been decided to postpone the deadline for closure of broadcasting operations until 31 May, 2002. [34] Radio Adriatic and Plavi Radio Mostar. [35] Neovisni Radio Primus and RTV Tomislavgrad. [36] Plavi Radio. [37] Final decision on ITC Kozarski Vijesnik will be reached in September, 2002 (as noted on page 41.) [38] Note: Tables for qualified stations include the information on which station has qualified for regional coverage (marked REGIONAL), as well as those that have qualified in the appellate procedure (marked APPELLATE PROCEDURE). This is used for tables for each of the regions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright (C) 2002 CRA | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
