Millennium Team d.o.o. v. Maja Nikolić

Maja Nikolić (Journalist)

N1

The hearing scheduled for September 10, 2026 was postponed for the second time because Stojan Vujko, legal representative of Millennium Team, did not come to the courtroom of the Third Basic Court in Belgrade. The plaintiff, for the second time, on the day of the hearing, justifies his absence by saying that he is on an alleged business trip on which he sent himself. The judge requested that Millennium Team’s lawyer inform the court within 15 days when Stojan Vujko will definitely be in Belgrade by the end of the year, so that a hearing could be scheduled and held. The lawyer of the defendant journalist also states that: “the legal representative of the private prosecutor twice did not attend the hearing for mediation, after filing the lawsuit with the request that the journalist be sentenced to prison.”

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 implementer of numerous projects that enjoy the political support of the authorities, including Belgrade on the water, construction of facilities for the needs of the EXPO 2027 exhibition, the National Stadium, etc.

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

A company that annually generates a net profit of several billion dinars is suing a journalist for damaging its business reputation and creditworthiness due to an article on a topic that is in the public interest of citizens.

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

A prison sentence is undoubtedly an unreasonable request and a direct attack on free journalistic reporting on topics of public interest.

4. 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.

A lawsuit was filed only against the portal’s journalist.

5. The plaintiff, or persons associated with the plaintiff, have participated or are currently participating in intimidating, harassing, or threatening actors involved in the public debate.

The company Millennium Team filed dozens of lawsuits against journalists, media, activists, and opposition politicians. This kind of action is clearly aimed at stifling the public debate about the affairs of this company engaged in numerous projects that the government has designated as strategic priorities and as projects of public interest. The company also threatened activists who protested against the demolition of Hotel Jugoslavija that they could face criminal charges.

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.

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed by this company against actors participating in the public debate. In this way, debate on topics of public interest is prevented. One of the lawsuits was filed against the activist Dejan Atanacković due to his columns and statements about the business of this company.

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 first trying to settle the dispute out of court.

8. The plaintiff uses procedural options aimed at increasing the costs of the procedure, e.g. postponement of hearings, non-attendance of witnesses or experts, as well as directing cases to be decided by eligible judges, as well as appointing biased experts, which significantly complicates the procedural position and reduces the chances of the defendant’s success in the proceedings.

The plaintiff has already failed to come to the hearing twice, and the court is informed about this only on the day of the hearing. He justifies his absences by official trips, on which he practically sends himself. Prolonging the duration of the hearing exhausts the defendant, who consistently approaches the procedure. Also, the journalist spends that time going to court instead of doing her job and is thus once again prevented from dealing with issues of public interest.