Law professors challenge newspaper headline on EU exemptions

Three law professors at Reykjavik University have challenged coverage by Morgunbladid, published by mbl.is, concerning a legal opinion they prepared for the prime minister. They say the subheading on the newspaper’s front page incorrectly described their position.

The subheading stated: “Three law professors believe no exemptions are available in accession negotiations.” The professors said the claim was false and did not reflect their legal opinion.

The opinion was prepared at the request of the Prime Minister’s Office by Gunnar Thor Petursson, Hafsteinn Dan Kristjansson and Margret Einarsdottir.

Morgunbladid’s front-page report quoted the director general of the Federation of Icelandic Fishing Vessel Owners and Companies about the opinion. The report said the professors considered permanent exemptions from the European Union’s common fisheries policy unavailable in accession negotiations.

In a statement, the professors referred readers to the opinion and its summary, and called for factual and careful media coverage of the document.

In an editor’s note, Morgunbladid said the professors were objecting to a subheading that referred to an interviewee’s interpretation of the legal opinion, rather than to the newspaper’s own conclusion. The newspaper said the interviewee’s words had been quoted accurately and rejected the claim that the report was false.

The newspaper added that it regularly seeks opinions on issues in public debate and does not censor the views of interviewees or take responsibility for their accuracy. It also said headlines and subheadings are intended to attract attention and cannot present the full story, which is covered in the body of the report.

The dispute concerns the distinction between permanent exemptions from core EU rules, known as opt-outs, and special solutions, or exemptions. The professors’ opinion says the terms “exemptions” and “special solutions” are not legally defined, although a special solution is nevertheless, by its nature, an exemption.

The opinion also says the EU may be more open to negotiating special solutions concerning circumstances specific to an applicant country than to an exemption, particularly an indefinite exemption from rules that otherwise apply to all member states. It adds that the broader an exemption is in scope and duration, the more difficult it is likely to be to secure.

Morgunbladid also cited a 2014 report by the University of Iceland’s Institute of Economic Studies on the difficulty other countries have faced in obtaining permanent exemptions from common EU policies.