Predrag Koluvija v. BIRN
Prosecutor
Predrag Koluvija
Businessman/businesswoman
2021 | Litigation procedure
Predrag Koluvija sued BIRN for the article: “The trial continued: Koluvija was in the marijuana business even before Jovanjica”. The prosecutor claims that BIRN Serbia published untruths in conveying information from the trial and demands monetary compensation for the mental pain suffered. In the lawsuit, it is claimed that the title of the text, as well as the text itself, contained false information about the fact that Koluvija had previously engaged in activities related to the cultivation of marijuana. In the text, BIRN reported in detail everything that was heard at the hearing in the Jovanjica case, where the prosecutor presented information from the court judgments of the Hungarian court for cannabis smuggling from 2011 and 2012, in which Koluvija is mentioned, as well as the responses of Koluvija’s defense and Koluvija himself to those allegations.
Basis of submission (according to which article of the law):
Article 200 of the Law on ObligationsDamages/penalty requested:
Koluvija is asking for 200,000 dinars to be paid to him in the name of mental pain.
Defendant
BIRN (Media)
Organization/Media
BIRN
Sector
Public information
Outcome - In progress
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.
Predrag Koluvija is a publicly known figure, indicted in a high-profile case and with evident political and social connections, which indicates a significant imbalance of power in relation to an independent investigative media outlet.
2. The arguments presented by the prosecutor are partially or completely unfounded.
BIRN reported accurate and verifiable information from a public trial, including statements from Hungarian court rulings and responses from the defense, indicating that claims of falsehoods are unfounded.
3. The lawsuit or legal remedy, that is, the request or proposal submitted by the plaintiff is disproportionate, excessive or unreasonable.
A disproportionate compensation of 200,000 dinars was requested.
4. Claims represent abuse of rights, i.e. distributive use of authority by public authorities against actors participating in public debate.
The use of a lawsuit to sanction a media outlet reporting on a trial of significant public interest indicates an abuse of the legal system aimed at restricting media freedom.
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 also against journalist Jelena Veljković and editor-in-chief Milorad Ivanović in their individual capacity.
Additional materials
