Tokens: 16
.
The
Court
has
repeatedly
held
,
as
the
majority
notes
,
that
a
norm
can
not
be
regarded
as
a
“
law
”
within
the
meaning
of
Article
10
§
2
unless
it
is
formulated
with
sufficient
precision
to
allow
a
person
to
regulate
his
or
her
conduct
(
§
143
of
the
judgment
)
.
In
the
present
case
,
the
notion
that
the
applicants
,
two
media
companies
,
would
have
foreseen
that
they
would
not
be
protected
by
the
journalistic
exemption
is
highly
implausible
(
see
§
143
of
the
judgment
)
in
view
of
the
text
of
the
applicable
law
and
also
taking
into
consideration
the
understanding
of
journalism
by
this
Court
.
Furthermore
,
two
prior
applications
of
the
Personal
Data
Act
had
held
,
respectively
,
that
public
taxation
data
could
be
provided
to
media
in
mass
deliveries
in
electronic
format
,
and
that
a
media
organisation
that
had
published
data
on
a
group
of
10,000
people
considered
to
be
the
wealthiest
people
in
Finland
had
processed
data
for
journalistic
purposes
(
see
§
38
of
the
judgment).[9
]
Labels: O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O