The team of journalists at KRIK. Credit: Oliver Bunic (NIN) Library

Self-defence against SLAPPs in Serbia

Self-defence against SLAPPs in Serbia

In Serbia, the investigative newspaper KRIK is the target of frequent legal harassment. To counteract it, the editorial team has developed strategies based on civil society solidarity, public denunciation and monitoring of trials

 

By Massimo Moratti
Originally published by OBCT. Also available in ITA.

In Serbia, SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) against independent journalists are causing increasing concerns.

 

What caused a stir was the start of the trial against the investigative journalism portal KRIK     by a judge of the Belgrade Court of Appeal, Dušanka Đorđević, who filed both a civil and criminal case against the journalists, demanding, among other things, a ten-month prison sentence and the imposition of an accessory penalty, a two-year ban from practicing the profession.

 

The charge? Publishing data on the judges’ assets, which were already public. The data in question are part of KRIK’s online database “Prosudi ko sudi” (which can be translated as “examine those who judge”), which discloses to the public the properties and financial status of judges presiding over highly sensitive cases, such as the murders of Prime Minister Đinđić and journalist Ćuruvija, or cases against prominent politicians and possible connections with the criminal world.

 

KRIK and SLAPPs

This is not the first harassing action targeting KRIK. In fact, the portal has collected 16 of them, most of which are civil cases, but there are also criminal or commercial cases.

 

Over time, KRIK journalists have become accustomed to it. They know that when they write about certain topics or mention certain people, they soon find themselves facing new legal harassment. Nonetheless, journalists seem to have found a way to coexist with SLAPPs and above all a way to combat and discourage them.

 

Distrust in the authorities

Many SLAPPs come from individuals close to the majority party or from members of the government majority. For this reason, despite the fact that the lack of media freedom is a sore point for Serbia and one of the obstacles to accession to the European Union, as found in the most recent EU Progress Report    , KRIK journalists do not believe that there is good will on the part of the Serbian authorities to contain the phenomenon.

 

Even if the government decides to adopt measures that reflect the content of the recent anti-SLAPP directive, as recommended on several occasions, “it is more than legitimate to suspect that such measures would in fact distort the content of the directive and turn it into another tool to muzzle the media,” as Bojana Jovanović, deputy editor-in-chief of KRIK, tells us.

 

Unfortunately, based on their experience, KRIK editors are doubtful about official initiatives and believe that, at best, they are merely formal efforts without any genuine will to solve the problem.

 

Per questo motivo, è molto meglio organizzarsi da soli e porre in atto strategie, tra organizzazioni della società civile, volte a sostenersi a vicenda e a contenere l’impatto delle SLAPP.

 

The strength of civil society

For this reason, it is much betterf or civil society organisations to self-organise and implement strategies aimed at supporting each other and containing the impact of SLAPPs.

 

KRIK’s experience is also useful for other organisations that are facing legal harassment and need to prevent those forms of intimidation that progressively lead to self-censorship and loss of quality of investigative journalism.

 

KRIK’s strategies are essentially based on solidarity among civil society organisations and on the public denunciation of SLAPPs. They clearly cannot replace the necessary legal assistance or material and psychological support among journalist organisations, but rather complement and strengthen them. These strategies consist of simple measures.

 

First, when KRIK journalists are informed that legal action has been initiated against them, they report the fact without trying to hide it, but publicly inform partners and donors that yet another SLAPP has been initiated.

 

In this way, the perpetrators of the harassment are exposed to the public and KRIK readers have the opportunity to show support and solidarity. This sends a clear signal that KRIK is not alone in facing legal harassment, but enjoys the support of other parts of civil society, international organisations and even diplomatic representations that care most about media freedom in Serbia.

 

As the case progresses and approaches the actual trial, it is very useful for the fairness and transparency of the proceedings to have independent observers following the case in court. They can be members of other professional organisations, civil society organisations, members of diplomatic representations and international organisations, both governmental and non-governmental.

 

Practice suggests that when there are observers present in the courtroom, tensions are reduced and the proceedings tend to follow the normal procedure, resulting in fairer treatment for defendants.

 

In order to better deal with SLAPPs, KRIK has joined forces with other organisations in the sector such as the Slavko Čuruvija Foundation and BIRN (the Balkan Investigative Journalism Network).

 

When one of these organisations is the target of a SLAPP, the others report the case through their channels and bring it to the attention of their readers.

 

The three organisations have decided to extend this media coverage also to local initiatives that find themselves facing similar situations.

 

Outside Belgrade, in fact, there are many journalists who are targeted by SLAPPs and their economic situation makes them even more vulnerable than the media in the capital, as the disproportion of forces is even greater. For this reason, when they learn of harassment against smaller outlets, in agreement with the interested parties, they report the news at the national level to discourage those who started the SLAPPs.

 

Finally, demonstrating that you are not intimidated by lawsuits and that you continue to do your job is another way to discourage SLAPPs. Showing that they do not have the desired effect and that journalists continue to write anyway removes the incentives to start new lawsuits.

 

Greater awareness of SLAPPs

In conclusion, it is also important to remember that, as Bojana argues, “now there is greater awareness of SLAPPs and not only those who work in the sector, but also the general public is learning to recognise them as another gag on the independent press”.

 

In the past, this was not the case; it was believed that these were limited cases and that the plaintiffs could have legitimate motivations, which could be proven in court. Now, however, we know that these lawsuits only intend to intimidate journalists and block their activity and are therefore rightly perceived in this light.

 

In this sense, it is important to continue to educate the public and spread awareness about this form of legal harassment.

The team of journalists at KRIK. Credit: Oliver Bunic (NIN) Library

Serbian judge’s lawsuits set to chill press freedom

Serbian judge’s lawsuits set to chill press freedom 

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) expresses grave concern regarding the legal threats facing the Serbian investigative news organization KRIK and its journalists. These abusive legal actions include demands for imprisonment and bans from journalism. We stand with the journalists on trial, and urge Serbia to implement anti-SLAPP safeguards to protect independent media.

KRIK is currently facing 16 Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), vexatious legal actions intended to intimidate the defendants rather than seek justice. Two of these, whose trial began recently, were initiated by Appellate Court Judge Dušanka Đorđević and her husband Aleksandar, a lawyer engaged by the Ministry of Finance. 

 

The couple accuses KRIK’s Stevan Dojčinović and Bojana Pavlović of data protection violations, after the journalists published details about Judge Đorđević’s assets and career in an award winning database aiming to increase transparency in the judiciary. According to KRIK, all the data was lawfully obtained from publicly accessible sources.

 

The plaintiffs seek penalties of €6,500 in damages, 10-month prison sentences, and 2-year bans on journalism for the accused journalists. Any conviction would set a dangerous precedent and severely undermine press freedom. 

 

The lawsuits exhibit all the characteristics of SLAPPs, as they seem to aim to intimidate the journalists rather than addressing legitimate legal concerns.

The MFRR consortium believes that the case is part of a broader campaign to silence KRIK for its investigative journalism. The outcome will be a test for the Serbian judiciary’s independence and commitment to the rule of law. It will also be a test of the judiciary’s ability to provide a fair trial and to ensure that the presiding judges are not unduly influenced by their colleagues bringing the case. 

 

A guilty verdict will have a terrible chilling effect on the media and potentially spell the end of investigative public interest journalism in the country. 

 

We stand in solidarity with KRIK and its journalists. The MFRR believes that this case presents all the features of a SLAPP and the relevant EU provisions, including early dismissal, should be taken into account by the judiciary. Furthermore, our consortium calls on the Serbian authorities to refer to the Council of Europe’s Recommendation on countering the use of SLAPPs, aligning domestic safeguards to prevent similar cases in the future with international human rights standards.

 

The MFRR will continue to monitor the case closely, to advocate for the public’s right to hold power accountable and against the erosion of independent journalism.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Event

Media Freedom in the Western Balkans: Challenges and Opportunities…

Media Freedom in the Western Balkans:

Challenges and Opportunities in the Framework of EU Enlargement 

07 October, 11:00 CET.

Free and independent media play a key role in ensuring citizens’ right to information on issues of public interest and in holding power into account. A sound media system is thus a pillar of democracy and the rule of law. 

 

Over the past years, the Media Freedom Rapid Response has noted a gradual deterioration of media freedom standards across EU member states and candidate countries. Common issues of concern include the increased interference of political powers in the governance of public service media, the lack of transparency in media ownership, precarious working conditions, and growing intimidation and threats against journalists and media professionals. 

 

These concerns have prompted EU institutions to take action and introduce new legislative tools to address such trends, such as the anti-SLAPP directive and the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). While aiming to harmonize media freedom standards across member states, these newly adopted norms will have an impact on candidate countries, as they move forward in the alignment with the EU acquis as part of the accession process. 

 

This webinar will present the updated results of two Shadow Reports on Media Freedom in Albania and Serbia prepared in collaboration with the Centre Science and Innovation for Development (SCiDEV) and the Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia. It will explore media freedom-related challenges and developments in the two candidate countries taking into consideration the ongoing negotiations to join the EU and the annual progress reports that the European Commission is expected to publish later in the autumn. 

Moderator

Serena Epis

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

Opening Remarks

Cristina Caputo

Adriatic and Balkan Unit, Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation

Maja Smrkolj

Political Desk Serbia DG NEAR, European Commission 

Speakers

Tamara Filipović

Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (IJAS)

Blerjana Bino

Centre Science and Innovation for Development (SCiDEV)

Final Remarks

Massimo Moratti

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

Digital security Library

Digital security in Serbia: Another challenge to media freedom

Digital security in Serbia: Another challenge to media freedom

Media outlets in the country are increasingly exposed to cyber attacks, online threats and manipulations. We talked about digital security and its impact on independent journalism in Serbia with Bojan Perkov, digital policy coordinator at SHARE Foundation.

 

Interview originally published by OBCT. Available in Italian here.

SHARE Foundation  is a Belgrade-based NGO that works on privacy protection, security and freedom of expression. The activities of the organisation include training, support and awareness raising on digital security for journalists, activists, civil society and human rights defenders. These are organised around four pillars: freedom of expression online, data protection, digital security, and free access to knowledge. The NGO has also developed the SHARE CERT  , the first special CERT (Computer Emergency Response Team) in Serbia for online media and civil society, offering incident response, training and mentorship to journalists and media organisations that incur in digital issues.

 

What are the main trends that you notice regarding digital security challenges in Serbia?

We recently published our yearly monitoring report in which we track violations in three main areas: cyber attacks, privacy and data protection issues, as well as frauds, threats and manipulations. In 2023, we recorded many threats and manipulations. During the election campaign, for example, opposition politicians faced significant digital threats, including a smear campaign involving an intimate video aired on national TV, which forced a politician to withdraw from the race.

 

Are media outlets and journalists major targets of digital rights violations?

Yes, they are frequently targeted, especially when they expose government wrongdoing. This makes them inconvenient for the authorities. Civil society organizations like CRTA also face attacks from high-ranking officials.

 

Who are the most common offenders and forms of online attacks?

Public officials and politicians are the major offenders. However, we also see attacks from citizens, especially on social media. While these citizen attacks are numerous, those from politicians have more severe consequences. As for the kind of attacks, we mostly observe smear campaigns, accusations, and insults, often through social media and pro-government media outlets. Private actors often use SLAPPs, strategic lawsuits against journalists who write about their activities. Investigative outlets like KRIK, for example, face numerous lawsuits and digital threats from powerful actors.

 

How do these digital security challenges impact journalism?

Journalists continue their work professionally despite threats. However, these attacks amplify public hatred towards them, creating a hostile environment.

 

Is there an awareness of the seriousness of digital threats among journalists and civil society organizations?

Awareness varies. Organizations that have experienced attacks are more vigilant, while others may not realize the severity of these threats.

 

How prepared are media outlets to face digital threats?

There is a gap among media outlets. Smaller local media often lack resources and digital security awareness. Investigative journalists, however, are well-prepared, receiving training and support, especially from international organizations like OCCRP. They often meet confidential sources in person and use encrypted apps like Signal. They implement proper digital security measures tailored to their threat models.

 

How do you assess Serbia’s legal framework regulating the digital environment, especially regarding media freedom?

It can be improved. Most laws are influenced by European integration. For instance, our law on personal data protection is modelled after GDPR but, it combines it with the law enforcement directive, making it complex. We also have the law on information security, primarily focused on critical infrastructure. Efforts to update it were stalled by political events.

 

Do you see a gap between the law and the practice?

Yes, implementation often lags due to a lack of political will. Independent institutions try their best, but the broader system is not supportive.

 

Is there a network or coalition advocating for digital security in the country? Do you have transnational links with counterparts in the EU and other regions?

We are part of the national CERT network and cooperate with other special CERTs. We represent civil society and media in these forums.

The SHARE Foundation is also a member of European Digital Rights (EDRi) and other networks, such as CiviCERT. We receive significant support from these coalitions, which is empowering and essential for our advocacy efforts. We also co-founded the Southeast European Digital Rights Network, involving diverse organizations from across the region.

This publication is the result of activities carried out within the Media Freedom Rapid Response and within ATLIB – Transnational Advocacy for Freedom of Information in the Western Balkans, a project co-funded by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation. All opinions expressed represent the views of their author and not those of the co-funding institutions.

Library

Serbia: Media independence is an exception rather than the…

Serbia: Media independence is an exception rather than the rule

Increasing political and financial pressure threatens the independence and editorial autonomy of many media outlets in Serbia. We interviewed Irina Milutinović, Senior Research Associate at the Institute of European Studies in Belgrade and co-author of the Country Report on Serbia of the Media Pluralism Monitor 2023.

 

Interview conducted by OBCT and originally published here

According to the Serbia Media Pluralism Monitor 2023, editorial independence is one of the areas in which Serbia registers high risks. What are the main threats to editorial autonomy in the country? 

Journalists suffer various forms of pressure, mostly of a political and financial nature. Independent editors in Serbia are an exception, rather than the rule. They are usually appointed by their media owners, who choose from among their loyal so that they can control journalists’ work from the inside through soft censorship.

 

Some significant forms of pressure come from SLAPPs as well as from smear campaigns, often initiated by state authorities and public officials and mostly targeting investigative and critical journalists as enemies of the country.

 

Political pressure is also applied through financial blackmail: state advertising and direct state subsidies are often allocated through politically biased and non-transparent mechanisms. Pro-government media are the biggest beneficiaries of this type of support, including tabloid media, although they often disregard the journalistic ethical code.

 

Finally, most TV and radio stations, as well as print media outlets, belong to companies that are under direct or indirect control of subjects close to the ruling party.

 

What impact do these challenges have on journalists and the quality of their work? 

First, I want to point out that the Serbian media market is highly concentrated and polarised, which means that pro-government media are larger, more numerous, and more influential, while more critical ones have smaller coverage and proportionally weaker public influence. Pro-government media tend to instrumentalise issues of public interest to foster a we vs them dialectic, where “us” are usually described as patriots, while “them” as traitors.

 

Another important feature of the media landscape is poor content pluralism, as most outlets tend to adopt and support the government’s political agenda without any critical approach. So critical voices remain marginalised and lose their capacity to contribute to democratic processes: there is zero debate and no bottom-up transfer of their proposals on government’s decisions.

 

Does this situation impact citizens’ trust in the sector? 

In general, citizens show low levels of trust in the media. Media literacy in Serbia is not good. Most citizens who live in marginalised communities are under a very strong influence of pro-government media. The public service broadcaster RTS has the biggest influence and is perceived as the most trustworthy media in the country.

 

What we notice is an increase in the number of people getting news online. In this regard, it is important to note that the digital space in Serbia is characterised by aggressive communication, threats, and insults, and the number of online attacks on journalists has increased, especially through social networks.

 

In recent years new Internet portals were opened without being properly registered: most of them do not publish an impressum so we don’t know who finances and owns them. A big problem is that these portals act as main spreaders of disinformation and fake news.

 

On the other hand, some digital media have become the real drivers of alternative voices. These portals usually deal with investigative and analytical journalism, offer diversified views, and give space to voices and topics that we cannot find in the mainstream media, such as corruption and criminal affairs, local community problems, human rights, ecology, etc. They are less exposed to political interference, so they have a bigger potential to function as platforms for democratic debate.

 

As part of the EU integration process, Serbia has to align with the EU set of norms, including those on media freedom. How would you assess the country’s legal framework regarding the media sector?

In October of last year, the National Assembly of Serbia introduced two new media laws: the Law on Public Information and Media and the Law on Electronic Media, whose provisions aim at implementing the objectives of the Media Strategy adopted in 2020.

 

Some positive developments must be noted. For example, the Law on Public Information and Media regulates in more detail the process of media co-financing and state aid. When it comes to the Law on Electronic Media, it introduces some provisions that potentially strengthen the independence of the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media (REM) and others that prescribe a more transparent process for the allocation of public funds.

 

However, not all the provisions of the new laws are harmonised with the Media Strategy and the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive.

 

Regarding editorial independence, for example, what is particularly worrisome is the return of the state to media ownership. According to the Law on Public Information and Media, state-owned companies can fund or own media outlets, a practice that is prohibited by the Media Strategy itself, which on the contrary recognises that the removal of every form of state participation in media ownership is a key factor for the improvement of media freedom in the country.

 

Do you think that the process of EU integration has an impact on the protection of press and media freedom in the country?

It is hard to say. It is true that the government occasionally undertakes some regulatory reforms as part of the EU accession process. But in practice, the adopted regulations are gradually ignored, so the ruling party manages to find ways to maintain and even increase their control over almost the entire media landscape.

 

Overall, I think the situation today is no better than, for example, ten years ago when the negotiation process formally began. I think the EU should honestly recognise that the Serbian government has reached the limits of its willingness to move Serbia forward along the path to EU membership.

 

Even if we don’t take into account Kosovo or the issue of sanctions on Russia, the rule of law and media freedom in Serbia are considered problematic areas that have blocked the opening of new negotiating clusters.

 

The institutional set-up has been further captured by the main governing party and the President himself. In this situation, the recognition that the current model is unsustainable if Serbia wants to move closer to EU membership seems to be the first step.

 

With this in mind, the EU should develop stronger relations with the main opposition parties in Serbia, sending a signal to Serbian citizens that there are other important political actors and partners in Serbia and that the ruling elite cannot claim that it is keeping Serbia on the EU membership path.

This interview was published by OBCT as part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) and within ATLIB – Transnational Advocacy for Freedom of Information in the Western Balkans, a project co-funded by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation. All opinions expressed represent the views of their author and not those of the co-funding institutions.

Library

Serbia: MFRR partners demand Belgrade court set Belarusian journalist…

Serbia: MFRR partners demand Belgrade court set Belarusian journalist free

Andrey Gniot at risk of deportation under politically motivated charges

The undersigned partner organizations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) demand the immediate release of Andrey Gniot, a Belarusian journalist and pro-democracy activist who is being held in custody by Serbian authorities on politically motivated charges formulated by the regime of Alexander Lukashenko. Since October, Serbian courts have been deliberating upon a request to deport Gniot to Belarus.

According to the Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ), an independent trade union in exile, Gniot was arrested immediately upon his arrival to Serbia on October 30. He was detained based on an international arrest warrant issued by Interpol upon request by authorities in Belarus on alleged tax evasion charges. After a first appeal, the High Court of Belgrade is currently deliberating on whether the conditions for Gniot’s extradition to Belarus have been met. 

 

The journalist first left his home country in 2021 after receiving “signals” that authorities were aware of his activism, which he had not made public out of fear of reprisal, according to reports by independent Belarusian media. After first moving to Thailand, the journalist flew for work to Serbia, a country which remains a major hub for exiled Belarusians and Russians, as it is one of the few in Europe which they can enter without a visa. He was unaware that an international arrest warrant had been issued against him.

 

Activism and journalistic activity in Belarus

Gniot is mainly known for his activities as a director of music and TV commercials, as well as a journalist and political activist. He is one of the founders of SOS BY, an independent union of Belarusian sportspeople, which reportedly contributed to the canceling of the 2021 Hockey World Cup in Belarus. The decision was made months before the event and was motivated in part by ongoing human rights abuses perpetrated by authorities in the wake of the 2020-21 mass protest movement against Lukashenko. SOS BY was later designated as an “extremist formation” by the Belarusian KGB, which made it possible to sentence its members to lengthy prison terms.  In addition, Gniot’s decision to leave Belarus was due in part to his contributions for Prague-based broadcaster RFE/RL, as he was concerned about the risk of arbitrary detention in retaliation for his journalistic work.

 

While Gniot is formally accused of tax evasion, he claims that he was never notified of these charges throughout the years during which he would have violated Belarusian tax laws. Tax evasion, as well as other charges, were also earlier used to incriminate Maryna Zolatava and Lyudmila Chekina, respectively the editor-in-chief and director general of Tut.by. The website used to be Belarus’ most popular independent online outlet before its forced closure by authorities in 2021.

 

In addition, Gniot’s lawyers reported that authorities in Minsk accused him based on a law adopted in 2019, while the charges are related to Gniot’s activities between 2012 and 2018.

 

Risk of political persecution in Belarus

Belarus remains Europe’s biggest jailer of journalists, with 36 media workers currently behind bars according to BAJ. The country of nine million also has the highest rate of imprisoned journalists per capita in the world.

 

Independent media are in practice fully banned at the national level, and independent journalists have been forced to go into exile, as staying in Belarus exposed them to inevitable repression due to current and past activities.

 

Since 2020, authorities have labelled thousands of media outlets, website pages, social media accounts and other online content as various forms of “extremism”: as a result, journalists and readers alike face fines and prison terms for any interactions, current or past, with independent outlets designated as such. Security forces are known for regular detentions of Belarusian journalists and independent media consumers for past activities, with the first group receiving prison or other sentences restricting their liberty, while the second are typically forced to record videos “confessing” their “extremism” before serving short-term prison terms (typically up to 15 days).

 

Given the likelihood of politically motivated repression in Belarus, we urge the High Court of Belgrade, which is currently handling Gniot’s case, to pronounce a decision in favour of his immediate release, as well as for competent authorities in Serbia to not appeal such a decision. 

 

Serbian authorities should take into account the unimaginable scale of repression of independent media in Belarus, and the fact that Belarusian authorities have weaponized tax evasion charges to take revenge on a journalist for his past successful activism against human rights abuses. Gniot’s deportation to Belarus would expose him to arbitrary detention and imprisonment, as well as inhumane treatment and torture while in custody.

 

Andrey must be set free and allowed to continue his professional activities in the country of his choice.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Article 19 Europe
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Serbian penal code Library

Urgent action needed to protect journalists Ana Lalić Hegediš…

Urgent action needed to protect journalists Ana Lalić Hegediš and Dinko Gruhonjić

To: 

 

Mr Vucic, President of Serbia

 

Mr Stamenkovic, Public Prosecutor in General Public Prosecution and member of the Standing working group

 

Ms Brnabic, Prime Minister and President of National Parliament 

 

Mr Gasic, Minister of Interior

 

Mr Jovanovic, Minister of Information and Telecommunication

 

We would like to bring to your attention the urgent situation concerning the safety of journalists Ana Lalić Hegediš and Dinko Gruhonjić, leaders of the Vojvodina Association of Independent Journalists (NDNV). Over the past fifteen days, both journalists have been subjected to an onslaught of online death threats following their participation in the Rebedu Festival in Dubrovnik. The situation escalated on 21 March when graffiti was discovered at Gruhonjić’s residence. The journalists are facing imminent threats to their lives, prompting urgent action from law enforcement.

 

Since 8 March, Lalić Hegediš has endured terrifying online death threats, some of a sexual nature, alongside grave insults targeting both her and the NDNV she leads. Similarly, since 14 March, Gruhonjić, program director of NDNV who is also a journalist and lecturer at Novi Sad University, has been subjected to a public campaign of intimidation, including threats of physical violence. This campaign stemmed from a manipulated video montage from Gruhonjić’s participation to the Rebedu Festival last year, giving the impression that Dinko was expressing his satisfaction at sharing a name with the Ustasha criminal Dinko Šakić, who was found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Second World war. 

 

On 21 March, an unknown individual went to Gruhonjić’ private residence to paint a threatening graffiti on the wall of the entrance of his building saying that Dinko will soon have “forever home”. The individual signed “Serbian Vojvodina”. The graffiti demonstrates the ease with which perpetrators can locate him and his family, underscoring the seriousness of the threats both journalists are facing. 

 

Despite the NDNV reporting the alarming threats to the high-tech crime prosecutor’s office and providing details of some of identified perpetrators, including those who signed threats with their names, no decisive action has been taken to conduct thorough investigation, arrest the perpetrators nor to provide the journalists with adequate protection. 

 

We urge authorities to launch immediate investigations and implement measures to ensure the safety and protection of Lalić Hegediš and Gruhonjić.

 

Politicians and officials must also be held accountable for their role in perpetuating hatred against journalists. Public statements from individuals such as Aleksandar Vulin, former director of the Security Information Agency and founder of the Socialist Movement party and Milenko Jovanov, MP at the Parliament last 18 March, only serve to escalate hatred and endanger lives. There are also serious concerns that members of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party are behind the lynching campaign against Lalić Hegediš and Gruhonjić. The person who filed a criminal complaint against them for allegedly inciting racial, religious and national hatred and intolerance during their participation in the forum is closely associated with party figures such as Aleksa Grubešić, member of the Serbian Progressive Party.

 

It is the responsibility of the State to protect journalists and provide them with the necessary protection to enable them to carry out their work. The policy of impunity in the face of threats to the independence of the press in Serbia must end. 

 

Thank you for your attention to these matters. We remain available for any further information.

Respectfully,

Ricardo Gutiérrez, General Secretary of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)  

Anthony Bellanger, General Secretary of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) 

Luisa Chiodi, Director of the Balkans and Caucasus Transeuropa Observatory (OBCT)  

Quinn McKew, Executive Director of ARTICLE 19

Oliver Money-Kyrle, Head of Europe Advocacy and Programmes at International Press Institute (IPI)

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

SafeJournalists Network 

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and candidate countries. 

Library

Serbia: escalating threats and attacks against journalists in Novi…

Serbia: escalating threats and attacks against journalists in Novi Sad

The escalation of threats and violence suffered by journalists in Novi Sad, northern Serbia, has reached an unprecedented level in the past fortnight. The undersigned organisations urge the Serbian authorities to conduct immediate and thorough investigation into the persistent attacks on journalists and ensure that perpetrators are prosecuted accordingly. 

In just ten days, no fewer than seven journalists have faced threats and assaults in the city of Novi Sad alone. Whether it is physical assaults, verbal abuse, online harassment or death threats, the ability of Serbian journalists to do their job is severely compromised and their safety is at risk. 

 

On 8 March 2024, journalists from Tanjug and Kurir Television, along with 021.rs radio, were verbally assaulted while covering a demonstration supporting Ana Mihaljica, whose three children were temporarily taken away from her by the Novi Sad Centre for Social Work. During a live broadcast on Tanjug, reporter Saška Drobnjak was interrupted by a woman claiming to be Mihaljica’s lawyer threatening the journalists, whom she accused of lying. A Tanjug photographer, a Kurir correspondent, and Žarko Bogosavljević of Reporter 021 were also verbally abused. According to the Association of Journalists of Serbia (UNS), the police present did not intervene to prevent interference in the journalists’ work. N1 correspondent Ksenija Pavkov also received numerous online insults and threats of physical violence for her coverage of the demonstration. 

 

That same week, two other journalists and leaders of the Vojvodina Association of Independent Journalists (NDNV), Ana Lalić Hegediš and Dinko Gruhonjić, received thousands of online death threats sent via social media and email. Ana Lalić Hegediš has been the target of terrifying death threats including some of sexual nature and insults, also directed at the NDNV she leads, for comments she made on nationalism at the “Rebedu” festival in Dubrovnik where she was invited as a panellist. Lalić mainly mentioned the Serbian authorities, who do not consider Vojvodina’s citizens as Serbs enough because of their multi-confessionalism and multi-ethnicity.

 

Since 14 March 2024, her colleague Dinko Gruhonjić, journalist lecturer at Novi Sad University and program director of NDNV, has feared for his life and those of members of his family.  Gruhonjić has been the target of a public lynching campaign including threats of physical violence since the publication of a video montage with excerpts from his performance at the Rebid festival in Dubrovnik last year. The montage was manipulated to give the impression that Dinko was expressing his satisfaction at sharing a name with the Ustasha criminal Dinko Šakić. NDNV reported these threats to the high-tech crime prosecutor’s office and, for some of them, provided the details of the perpetrators who signed with their names. 

 

“We have been under attack with the Association for decades. But this time, it’s the greatest pressure ever. Who knows what will happen to us” worries Lalić, while Gruhonjić deplores the “policy of impunity when it comes to threats against the independence of the press in Serbia, even when the perpetrators are not anonymous”.

 

“The number of threats and insults against journalists is on the rise in Serbia. Knowing that Serbia is a country where the three murders of journalists in the last three decades have not been punished, we are very worried about every threat against journalists that goes unresolved,” said Tamara Filipović, project manager of the Association of Independent Journalists of Serbia (NUNS).

 

On 15 March 2024, a resident of Novi Sad filed criminal complaints against Gruhonjić and Lalić for allegedly inciting racial, religious, and national hatred and intolerance during their participation at the forum in Dubrovnik. “We have serious reasons thinking the plaintiff is connected to members of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party” declared Gruhonjić. Some politicians have revived the insults in public debates.  

 

We join the Safe Journalists Network in calling on officials to refrain from targeting the media in Serbia. Their hostile rhetoric legitimises and normalises verbal and physical violence against journalists and media workers. We urge authorities to guarantee a safe environment for journalists, allowing them to work without fearing for their lives, and to put an end to the unacceptable culture of impunity by systematically investigating attacks and complaints.

Signed by:

  • ARTICLE19 Europe
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
  • Safejournalists network

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Library

SafeJournalists and MFRR: Physical Confrontation with Journalist in Serbia…

SafeJournalists and MFRR: Physical Confrontation with Journalist in Serbia is Unacceptable and Must be Sanctioned

 

SafeJournalists Network and the Media Freedom Rapid Response strongly condemn the behavior of the local authorities in Indjija, who forcibly removed the journalist Verica Marincic from the municipality building and prevented her from doing her job. We appeal to the competent authorities to investigate this incident in which the journalist was injured

The journalist of the In media portal from Indjija, Verica Marincic, was kicked out of the Indjija municipality building because she “wasn’t on the list” to monitor the conference regarding the residents’ protest against the abolition of the railway station. In a video published by N1 television, it is seen that a member of the security forces removed the journalist from the building using physical force.

 

Verica Marincic says that she came to see off the protest that was announced earlier, and when she saw that Indija journalists were entering the building, she followed them, but was met at the entrance by the chief of staff of the municipal president, who told her that she could not go to the conference.   

 

“I took my phone to record what he was saying to me and he grabbed my left upper arm because I had a phone in that hand and squeezed me expecting the phone to fall out of my hand. Because I didn’t want to let go, he took my phone. When he saw that it was all being recorded by a journalist from N1, then he withdrew. After that, a man from security came out and started pushing me to go outside,” stated Verica Marincic. The whole case was reported to the competent authorities.

 

The SafeJournalists Network and Media Freedom Rapid Response call on the state to urgently send a message that this kind of behavior is unacceptable and to condemn this kind of behavior towards journalists. The SafeJournalists and MFRR also appeal to public officials and politicians to refrain from targeting media in Serbia, because their rhetoric encourages individuals to later threaten the media and media workers.

 

Each attack on journalists is an attack on public interest, democracy and the rights of all citizens.

Signed by:

SafeJournalists Network

 

Association of Journalists of Kosovo

 

Association of Journalists of Macedonia

 

BH Journalists Association

 

Croatian Journalists’ Association

 

Independent Journalists Association of Serbia

 

Trade Union of Media of Montenegro

 

Media Freedom Rapid Response

 

ARTICLE 19 Europe

 

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

 

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

 

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

 

Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

 

International Press Institute (IPI)

This statement was coordinated by the SafeJournalist Network and signed by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and candidate countries. 

MFRR 3 consortium logos
Event

The true cost of journalism: Ongoing impunity cases in…

The true cost of journalism:

Ongoing impunity cases in Europe

19 February, 11:00 CET.

On 21 February 2018, journalist Ján Kuciak and his fiancée Martina Kušnírová were murdered in Veľká Mača, Slovakia. The assassination sparked mass protests and the eventual resignation of Prime Minister Robert Fico. Although those who ordered and carried out the murder have been found guilty and sentenced to time in prison, the alleged mastermind was acquitted in May 2023.

 

During the latest MFRR webinar, marking the sixth anniversary of the murder of Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová, panellists will discuss ongoing impunity cases for crimes against journalists in Europe with a spotlight on Slovakia, Turkey, and Serbia.

Moderator

Jasmijn de Zeeuw

Legal Advisor, Free Press Unlimited

Speakers

Massimo Moratti

Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBC Transeuropa)

Barış Altıntaş

Co-Director, Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)

Lukas Diko

Editor-in-Chief, Investigative Center of Jan Kuciak