6 NISKASAARI AND OTAVAMEDIA OY v. FINLAND JUDGMENT THE LAW I. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE CONVENTION 25. The applicants made a complaint under Article 6 of the Convention, alleging excessive length of the criminal proceedings brought against them. 26. Article 6 § 1 of the Convention reads in the relevant parts as follows: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal ...” 27. On 9 August and 6 September 2012 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Finland in respect of the alleged excessive length of proceedings against an undertaking by the Government to pay them 2,500 euros to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as 1,000 euros (inclusive of value-added tax) to cover any costs and expenses, which would be free of any taxes that might be applicable. These sums would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. In the event of failure to pay these sums within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on it, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment would constitute the final resolution of the case. 28. The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of this part of the application. Accordingly, it is appropriate to strike out of the list the complaint as to the alleged excessive length of the domestic legal proceedings. II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 10 OF THE CONVENTION 29. The applicants complained under Article 10 of the Convention that their freedom of expression had been violated. In their submission, there had been no legitimate reason to interfere with their freedom of expression and the interference had not been necessary in a democratic society. 30. Article 10 of the Convention reads as follows: “1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.