A/69/286 some laws provide for fines in case of illegal advertisements an d specify procedures for their removal (see the response of the National Commission of Uganda), civil society groups report that these are often not effective (see the responses of Résistance à l’agression publicitaire and Paysages de France). 78. Responses to the questionnaire show that in most countries, outdoor advertising falls under the jurisdiction of local governments or municipal departments. Some municipalities regulate the permissible size, number and zones for outdoor advertisement and determine areas for public interest information and political advertising. Agreements may be concluded with companies to provide bus shelters and public toilets, for example, in exchange for the right to place advertisements on them (see the response of Paysages de France). 79. The uncontrolled expansion of advertisements has prompted some national and local authorities to take action (see the responses of Colombia and El Salvador). In 2006, for example, the adoption by the city of Sao Paulo, Brazil, of a “clean city” law resulted in the removal of 15,000 advertisements before the city adopted new regulations setting out clear rules. 80. In various countries, civil society organizations denounce excessive advertising and illegal billboards. Written requests asking au thorities to act against the latter have been largely ignored, allowing billboards to remain in place for years before tribunals reach a decision (see the response of Paysages de France). Instead, in some cases, those denouncing unlawful billboards have fo und themselves facing defamation lawsuits by advertising companies. 39 Some groups also engage in direct actions to remove unlawful billboards or simply to protest against the proliferation of billboards. Alternatively, some groups have transformed, mocked a nd distorted the advertising messages disseminated on billboards, in direct response to their messages and to contest the values and aspirations they promote. 81. The imbalance in power in these situations is of concern. The few companies holding the worldwide market for outdoor advertising, including in bus or train stations and airports, can end up deciding what is displayed in the public space. 40 82. The question is one of proportion: the number of outdoor advertisements, their size, locations and the technologies used, such as digital billboards and screens, render advertisements omnipresent and inescapable. Billboards obstruct people ’s engagement with their environment, including parks, built heritage or the landscape, and, by exhorting people to become mere consumers, adversely affect their sense of citizenship. The Special Rapporteur notes with concern the numerous cases of people having the windows of their houses covered by large billboards, despite their opposition, and of trees cut down to ensure greater visibility of billboards. 83. Billboards and other outdoor advertising devices affect far more than the private property on which they are installed; indeed, the commercial value of billboards is determined by the number of viewers passing by. Obser vers argue that, in reality, companies purchase public space rather than merely hire private property (e.g., a wall on a private building). __________________ 39 40 18/26 See the case of Defi France v. Paysages de France, Criminal Tribunal of Grenoble, 2013; Cour t of Appeal of Grenoble, 2004; and Cour de Cassation, 2005. For instance, CBS Outdoor and JC Decaux refused to display an image chosen by the Imperial War Museum in Manchester , 2013; see http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-24565194. 14-58963