Sanja Petrić v. Dragana Arsić and Nikola Arežina
Prosecutor
Sanja Petrić
Businessman/businesswoman
2021 | Litigation procedure
Co-owner of the company “Galens,” Sanja Petrić, filed a lawsuit against Dragana Arsić and Nikola Arežina for material damages allegedly suffered due to the cutting of a fence in two places and the cutting of a padlock on a gate. The incident took place during a protest held on October 9, 2021. year. While walking along a fence approximately 10 kilometers long, participants noticed holes suggesting they had been dug by animals attempting to escape. One of the activists used a grinder to cut the wire in several places. Following this, Dragana Arsić and another activist lowered the wire by hand, aiming to create a passage through the fence. Their intention was clear: to open a path for people and animals and to send a strong message about the problematic fencing of plots within the National Park.
Walking along a forest path, the activists reached the “Neven” spring, where a traditional water fountain is located. Due to the fence, animals could not access the water source. Dragana Arsić suggested removing the metal anchors, and as a result of one activist’s actions, the wire was cut at that point as well. Arsić concluded that what had been done so far was a clear and sufficient message.
Continuing the walk, an activist cut the padlock with a grinder and opened the gate. The protest walk and the fence-cutting action, as stated by participants, were not directed against the plaintiff or her family. The goal was to draw public attention to the fact that the yellow hiking trail had been blocked by a fence, preventing passage through the National Park.
The lawsuit was dismissed as unfounded. In its ruling, the court cited the public interest, recognizing the activists’ action as a symbolic act of highlighting institutional negligence.
Basis of submission (according to which article of the law):
Article 154. Law on obligationsDamages/penalty requested:
22.456,97 dinars
Defendant
Dragana Arsić, Nikola Arežina (Activist)
Organization/Media
Movement “Defend the Forests of Fruška Gora”
Sector
Ecology and environmental protection
Outcome - Completed
The claim was dismissed as unfounded.
Present characteristics
1. By filing the lawsuit that initiated the proceedings, the plaintiff is using an imbalance of power — such as financial advantage, political/social influence, or authority as a public official — to exert pressure on the defendant, who is an actor participating in public debate.
Sanja Petrić is the co-owner of Galens, a major investor with substantial financial resources, while the defendants are environmental activists acting in the public interest. This highlights a clear imbalance of power and an attempt to exert pressure through legal proceedings.
2. The arguments presented by the prosecutor are partially or completely unfounded.
The claim for damages is based on a protest activity which, according to the court ruling, constituted a symbolic act carried out in the public interest, with no intent to cause harm to the plaintiff.
3. The lawsuit or legal remedy, that is, the request or proposal submitted by the plaintiff is disproportionate, excessive or unreasonable.
A lawsuit over an action that was part of a protest walk and aimed at highlighting the issue of blocked access within a National Park constitutes a disproportionate response to a symbolic act of resistance against poor practices in the management of protected areas.
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 private lawsuit as a means against activists who are highlighting a systemic issue in the management of public resources constitutes an abuse of the legal system aimed at silencing criticism.
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.
Sanja Petrić, together with her husband Nebojša Petrić, filed multiple lawsuits—both criminal and civil—against Dragana Arsić within a short period of time, indicating a pattern of multiple and coordinated legal actions targeting the same activist.
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 is no available information indicating that Sanja Petrić attempted to contact the activist prior to filing the lawsuit in order to resolve the dispute out of court. The absence of any attempt at an amicable settlement suggests a lack of good faith in initiating the lawsuit.
