Ivan Bošnjak and Stojan Vujko v. InfoVranjske.rs and Saša Stojković

Team for Development and Integration, publisher of the media outlet InfoVranjske.rs, editor-in-chief Saša Stojković (Publisher)

InfoVranjske

1. With the lawsuit that initiated the procedure, the plaintiff uses an imbalance of power, such as his financial advantage, political/social influence or authority as a power holder, in which way he puts pressure on the defendant – an actor participating in the public debate.

Millennium Team is one of the largest construction companies in Serbia and the contractor for the Belgrade Waterfront project, a major construction endeavor with political support from the government.

2. The arguments presented by the prosecutor are partially or completely unfounded.

The claim is based on the republication of a statement made at a political party’s press conference, which, in accordance with the standards of the European Court of Human Rights, may be considered credible and legitimate journalistic conduct—especially when the content is accurately quoted and clearly attributed to a third party. In this specific case, InfoVranjske reported on a statement made by a political figure concerning a matter of public interest (corruption and ties between the government and the private sector). This points to the likely groundlessness of the allegation of reputational harm.

3. The lawsuit or legal remedy, that is, the request or proposal submitted by the plaintiff is disproportionate, excessive or unreasonable.

The initial compensation claim of two million dinars was disproportionate, and the subsequent reduction to 24,000 RSD indicates that the original demand was not aimed at achieving fair satisfaction, but rather at exerting pressure.

4. Claims represent abuse of rights, i.e. distributive use of authority by public authorities against actors participating in public debate.

Although formally a private entity, Millennium Team holds the status of a regular state partner with close ties to government officials. The use of repressive legal mechanisms to silence criticism indicates an abuse of rights by an actor closely connected to holders of public authority.

5. The lawsuit is filed (also) against an individual, namely the responsible editor of the media outlet and/or journalist, and not (only) against the organization that organized the disputed activity, or the publisher of the media outlet and/or journalist who published the news as part of the public debate.

The lawsuit was also filed against the editor-in-chief, Saša Stojković, as a natural person.

6. The plaintiff, or persons related to the plaintiff, in the previous period were or are now participants in multiple and coordinated filing of lawsuits against actors participating in the public debate.

The company “Millennium Team” filed several lawsuits during the same period against various media outlets for republishing identical or similar statements.

7. The plaintiff did not initiate out-of-court mechanisms for resolving the disputed matter before filing the lawsuit, or the prosecutor, as a holder of public authority, did not issue a warning or admonishment to the defendant but filed the lawsuit immediately.

There are no indications that the plaintiff attempted to resolve the dispute through out-of-court measures prior to initiating legal proceedings, such as requests for correction, warnings, or any other form of communication with the defendant.

8. On the occasion of the same event in the framework of public debate, several lawsuits were filed against the same defendant on different grounds.

Millennium Team filed an additional lawsuit against the publisher of InfoVranjske over the same article, this time on the grounds of damage to business reputation.