Broadcasting law: ORF should apply for higher ORF contribution

The Austrian public broadcaster ORF faces legal challenges after the government abruptly cut its federal subsidy by 93 million euros. Independent expert Leonhard Dobusch, a member of the ORF’s board of trustees, has called on General Director Ingrid Thurnher to initiate proceedings to raise the mandatory contribution rate, arguing that this step is necessary to challenge the cuts legally. The move comes amid growing concerns over whether the reduction violates both EU law and constitutional principles. The decision to reduce the funding was announced shortly before the end of the fiscal year, leaving the ORF with significantly less financial support. Dobusch emphasized that under the ORF Act, general directors are legally obligated to pursue a contribution increase if their financial situation deteriorates. He pointed to recent analysis by renowned media law expert Hans Peter Lehofer, who warned that the new rules governing public broadcasting financing could be problematic from both European Union and constitutional perspectives. According to Lehofer, the Constitutional Court has established that the state bears responsibility for funding public radio, while the EU requires sustainable and predictable financial resources for such services. Lehofer explained that although the law sets a maximum contribution amount of 15.30 euros per person until 2029, it also allows for adjustments if the ORF cannot meet its costs through existing revenue streams. This means that if the current funding levels prove insufficient, the broadcaster can seek higher contributions. However, he noted that the process must begin before any legal action against the budget cuts can proceed. “Without showing that the ORF is unable to cover its costs through other means,” Lehofer wrote, “any claim against the reduction would lack legal foundation.” Despite these legal arguments, Lehofer doubts that General Director Thurnher will take the initiative to start the contribution adjustment process. He suggests she might prefer to coordinate the move with the newly appointed director, Clemens Pig, who will take office on January 1, 2027. Pig, who expressed his intention to challenge the funding cuts during a recent interview, may find himself in a difficult position if the process begins too soon. “It seems unlikely that either of them would want to start a confrontation right away,” Lehofer remarked. The ORF’s financial situation has been strained by the sudden loss of nearly ten percent of its income. With the upcoming meeting of the ORF Board of Trustees on August 11, the issue of raising the contribution rate is expected to come up. During this session, the board will also appoint the remaining directors. Dobusch has made it clear that Thurnher should act promptly, given the urgency of the situation. “This is not just a matter of preference,” he stated in his blog post. “It is a legal requirement.” Legal experts warn that without sufficient funding, the ORF could face serious consequences. They argue that the abrupt withdrawal of funds may conflict with the EU Media Freedom Regulation, which mandates that public broadcasters have access to adequate and stable financial resources. If the ORF fails to secure additional funding, it risks violating these regulations, potentially leading to further legal complications. While the exact impact of the cuts remains unclear, one thing is certain: the ORF must now navigate a complex legal landscape to protect its operations and compliance with international standards.