Ivan Manojlović v. Milan Nikolić
Prosecutor
Ivan Manojlović
Politician
2026 | Criminal procedure
The mayor of Kruševac filed a private criminal complaint against Milan Nikolić for posting on the “Events in Kruševac” Facebook group. The lawsuit states that the defendant is the administrator of this group and that the disputed post insults the mayor. On the disputed post there is a photograph of a man in a suit and halter, without a face, generated by artificial intelligence with the description: “We did not fully find out what happened at the party called HALTER AFFAIR?”. The defendant states that: “The announcement regarding the gay party in Kruševac where the police intervened due to disturbing public order and peace, so the question was raised as to who participated in that party, is it true that they participated from the top of the local government in Kruševac, why doesn’t the mayor come out publicly and deny those rumors?” In the lawsuit, it is written that Nikolić is the administrator of the group and that he allowed, i.e. that he did not delete comments where people wrote that it was about the mayor and posted his picture. The defendant states that he previously received various warnings and that he once paid a fine of 50,000 dinars due to a similar case, i.e. then the state sued him for the crime of causing panic and riots also because of the post on Facebook. The lawsuit also states that two people posted the same artificially generated image in the comments, but with the mayor’s face, and that the group administrator did not prevent it.
Basis of submission (according to which article of the law):
Article 170 of the Criminal CodeDamages/penalty requested:
According to Article 170 of the Criminal Code, whoever offends another will be fined from twenty to one hundred daily amounts or a fine from forty thousand to two hundred thousand dinars, but if the act was committed through the press, radio, television or similar means or at a public meeting, the perpetrator will be fined from eighty to two hundred and forty daily amounts or a fine from one hundred fifty thousand to four hundred fifty thousand dinars.
Defendant
Milan Nikolić (Other)
Sector
Public information
Outcome - In progress
On April 3, 2026, the main hearing was scheduled in the Basic Court in Kruševac. The next hearing is scheduled for September 11, 2026. 09. 2026.
Present characteristics
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.
The plaintiff is the mayor of Kruševac, a former MP from the ranks of the Serbian Progressive Party, which gives him a political advantage over the defendant and creates an imbalance of power in the process.
2. The arguments presented by the prosecutor are partially or completely unfounded.
The defendant only asked the question why the mayor is not commenting on the incident, he did not connect him to the incident itself in any way. The statement of the defendant on the social network was written in the capacity of criticism of the mayor in his performance of official duties, which does not fall under the criminal offense for which he was sued.
3. The lawsuit or legal remedy, that is, the request or proposal submitted by the plaintiff is disproportionate, excessive or unreasonable.
The provision of the Criminal Code referred to by the prosecutor foresees a fine of up to 450,000 dinars if the act was committed through the press, radio, television or similar means or at a public gathering.
4. Claims represent abuse of rights, i.e. distributive use of authority by public authorities against actors participating in public debate.
The plaintiff is a public official who is obliged to endure a greater degree of criticism, and not to stifle and prevent the actors-participants of the public debate from criticizing his work.
5. The lawsuit was filed against (i) an individual, i.e. a responsible media editor and/or a journalist and not (only) against an organization that organized the disputed activity, i.e. a media publisher and/or a journalist who published the news within a public debate.
Yes, a lawsuit was filed against an individual due to a post on a Facebook group and the lawsuit mentions other people’s comments, and the plaintiff states in the lawsuit that the defendant is allegedly the administrator of that group and that he did not remove disputed comments, although this issue is not regulated by law as an obligation of administrators of groups on social networks. The plaintiff had the opportunity to report disputed content and comments to the Facebook platform itself, which has its own internal policies for removing inappropriate content.
6. The plaintiff, or persons associated with the plaintiff, have previously been or are currently involved in multiple coordinated lawsuits filed against participants in the public debate.
The plaintiff is an official of the ruling party, many of whose members filed lawsuits against journalists, media, and activists.
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.
The lawsuit was filed without any attempt to resolve the dispute through out-of-court mechanisms.
