allegations, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a journalist to start preparing a programme in which homosexuals are portrayed as anything else than sick, disturbed, criminal or wanting to change their sex. They contend that several of such programmes have been broadcast by FBC in the recent past. 2.7 The authors state that the same matter has not been submitted for examination under another pro­ cedure of international investigation or settlement. 3. By its decision of 28 March 1980, the Human Rights Committee transmhted the communication under rule 91 of the provisional rules of procedure to the State party, requesting information and observa­ tions relevant to the question of admissibility. 4. By a note dated 9 June 1980, the State party, while rejecting the allegation that the Government of Finland was in breach of article 19 of the Covenant, confirmed that there were no further domestic remedies available to the alleged victims in the sense of article 5 (2) Ф) of the Optional Protocol. The State party argued that the authors of the communication appeared to give to the concept of freedom of speech, protected by article 19 of the Covenant, a content different from that generally used by maintaining that it would restrict the right of the owner of a means of communication to decide what material will be published. The State party expressed its expectation that the Committee would focus its attention on this issue when considering the question of admissibility of the communication in the hght of the provisions of article 3 of the Optional Pro­ tocol. 5. By decision of 25 July 1980 and on the basis of the information before it, the Committee concluded: (fl) That the communication was admissible; (¿7) That, in accordance with article 4 (2) of the Op­ tional Protocol, the State party be requested to submit to the Committee, within six months of the date of the transmittal to it of this decision, written explanations or statements clarifying the matter and the remedy, if any, that may have been taken by it. 6.1 In its submission under article 4 (2) of the Op­ tional Protocol, dated 25 February 1981, the State party refutes the allegation that there has been a violation of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in Finland. It affirms that the Finnish legislation in force, including the Finnish Penal Code, was scrutinized in connection with the process of ratifying the Covenant and found to be in conformity with k. It stresses that the purpose of the prohibition of public encouragement to indecent behaviour between members of the same sex is to reflect the prevailing moral conceptions in Finland as inter­ preted by the Parliament and by large groups of the population. It further contends that discussion in the Parhament indicates that the word "encouragement" is to be interpreted in a narrow sense. Moreover, the Legislative Committee of the Parliament expressly pro­ vided that the law shall not hinder the presentation of factual information on homosexuality. 6.2 The State points out that there has not been any case where any person was convicted under paragraph 9 (2) of chapter 20 of the Penal Code and concludes that "the application of the paragraph in question shows no indication of an interpretation of the term in such a large sense that might be considered to unduly hmit the freedom of expression.". 6.3 While admitting that paragraph 9 (2) constitutes a certain restriction on freedom of expression, the State specifically refers to article 19 (3) of the Covenant, which states that the exercise of the rights provided for in article 19 (2) may be subject to certain restrictions, in so far as these are provided by law and are necessary for the protection of public order, or of pubhc heahh or morals. 6.4 Yet, the State contends that the decision of the Finnish Broadcasting Company concerning the pro­ grammes referred to by the submitting organization did not involve the application of censorship but were based on "general considerations of programme policy in ac­ cordance with the internal rules of the Company". 7. On 7 May 1981, the authors presented an addi­ tional submission in which they discuss in general terms the impact of paragraph 9 (2) of chapter 20 of the Penal Code on journalistic freedom. They argue that article 19 in connection with article 2 (1) of the Covenant requires Finland "to ensure that FBC not only deals with the subject of homosexuality in its programmes but also that it affords a reasonable and, in so far as is possible, an impartial coverage of information and ideas on the subject, in accordance with its own programming regulations". On this basis they challenge, in particular, the relevant programme directive of FBC of 30 October 1975, still in force today, which states, inter alia, "All persons responsible for programmes are requested to observe maximum strictness and carefulness, even when factual information about homosexuality is given", drawing attention at the same time to the fact that on the same day a written warning had been issued to the head of the film service of FBC to reject any production which gave a "positive picture of homosexuality". In addition, they dispute the State party's contention that the decisions taken by the Finnish Broadcasting Com­ pany with respect to radio and television programmes dealing with homosexuality were based on general con­ siderations of programme policy and did not constitute censorship measures taken in pursuance of paragraph 9 (2) of chapter 20 of the Penal Code. 8. The Committee, considering the present com­ munication in the light of all information made available to it by the parties as provided for in article 5 (1) of the Optional Protocol, hereby decides to base its views on the facts as submitted by the parties, which are not in dispute. 9.1 In considering the merits of the communication, the Human Rights Committee starts from the premise that the State party is responsible for actions of the Fin­ nish Broadcasting Company (FBC), in which the State holds a dominant stake (90 per cent) and which is placed under specific government control. 125