Predrag Koluvija v. KRIK (2)

KRIK (media), Stevan Dojčinović (Editor-in-Chief and Responsible Editor) (Media)

KRIK

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 with political and social connections, who is subject to a criminal proceeding in a case of significant public interest, indicating a power imbalance in relation to the independent investigative media outlet and its editor.

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

The disputed articles are reports from the trial and contain information from the statements of the prosecution, defense, and relevant procedural documents, which indicates legitimate and professional journalistic reporting without violating the presumption of innocence.

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 2.8 million dinars is grossly disproportionate to the action that is the subject of the dispute, considering that it concerns standard journalistic reporting from a public trial.

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 KRIK as a media outlet and against the chief editor as well.

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 plaintiff is currently undergoing a court trial where he is accused of being the leader of an organized criminal group. He has repeatedly resorted to judicial pressure against journalists covering his case. Inspectors connected to his case have received direct threats.

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 has filed multiple lawsuits against media outlets and investigative journalists covering his case.

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.

In addition to this lawsuit, Predrag Koluvija has already filed at least one previous lawsuit against the KRIK editorial team and/or its editors concerning the reporting on the trial in the “Jovanjica” case, indicating a pattern of multiple legal actions against the same media outlet.