Milan Tadić v. NDNV

Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina (NDNV), publisher of the Vojvodina Investigative-Analytical Center (VOICE), editor-in-chief Dinko Gruhonjić, and journalists Ivana Kragulj, Tamara Mladenović, Divna Prusac, Aleksandra Bučko, and Ranka Ivanovska (Publisher)

VOICE

According to the latest information, the proceedings are still ongoing.

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.

Plaintiff Milan Tadić, as the representative of a company that has received several hundred million dinars from the budget through public procurements and as a person reportedly close to the ruling Serbian Progressive Party, represents an actor with political and economic influence.

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

The lawsuit concerns an article based on facts from publicly available data on public procurements, indicating that it constitutes legitimate journalistic investigation. The fact that the article is grounded in data from official sources diminishes the validity of the claims of defamation and damage to reputation.

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

The claim for damages in the amount of one million dinars per person is clearly disproportionate to the action that is the subject of the dispute.

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

The use of lawsuits in the context of media reporting on the expenditure of public funds by actors connected to the political establishment indicates an attempt to use the legal system to silence or intimidate the journalistic community.

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 filed simultaneously against the publisher of the VOICE portal, editor-in-chief Dinko Gruhonjić, and six journalists as natural persons.

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.

Aleksandra Jovičić, connected to the same issue and journalistic content, filed a separate, parallel lawsuit, indicating a coordinated approach aimed at exerting additional pressure on the editorial team.

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.

Two separate lawsuits were filed (by Aleksandra Jovičić and Milan Tadić) concerning the same event—the publication of the same article.