Jelena Trivan v. Nemanja Rujević

Vreme (media), Damir Kalember (editor-in-chief), Nemanja Rujević (Journalist)

Vreme

The Court of Appeal decided 13. 12. 2024. on 13 December 2024 that the editor-in-chief of the weekly “Vreme” and the journalist Nemanja Rujević must pay Jelena Trivan 80,000 dinars for defamation, because in the text published five years ago, it was stated that she copied at least 15 percent of her doctoral thesis without citing the source. The court did not dispute the allegations from the text “Anatomy of a Dissertation”, writes Vreme, but according to the verdict, only experts can determine whether a work is plagiarized or not, and journalists, as stated in the verdict, are not experts.

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.

During her career, Trivan held leading positions in various public institutions (director of the Official Gazette, general director of Telekom Srpska). During 2023. she was and adviser to then Prime Minister of Serbia, Ana Brnabić, and is mentioned in the media as a person close to the ruling party.

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

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit for allegations that were not disputed. There are softwares that are publicly available to anyone that can determine if a certain work is plagiarized.

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

The plaintiff demands that the defendants jointly and severally pay her one million dinars, plus default interest. The requested amount is excessive and aims at the financial exhaustion of the defendant.

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

The plaintiff is recognized by the public as a close associate of the ruling party. Trivan was also a public official, which puts her in a position where she is justified in being exposed to a greater degree of criticism. Filing a lawsuit against the media is an attempt to prevent the public from being informed about public officials and prevent further public debate.

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.

The lawsuit was filed against journalists, the media and the responsible editor, which leads to the individualization of pressure on the defendants through the misuse of legal mechanisms.

6. The prosecutor 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 immediately filed the lawsuit.

Initiating a lawsuit without first trying to resolve the dispute out of court aims to intimidate journalists and put pressure on them, as well as to discourage them in the future from dealing with topics concerning officials, holders of public authority.