KRIK requested the conclusion of the debate, the court decided to hear the journalists and Nikola Petrović again.

Such a decision was made yesterday by the judge of the Higher Court in Belgrade, Nataša Jevđenijević, despite the objections of the KRIK defense. The proceedings are being repeated after the Appellate Court overturned the first-instance ruling in favor of Petrović in the case related to KRIK's revelations about his former business ties with Dejan Stanimirović Markos.

A hearing was held yesterday in the Higher Court in Belgrade in the repeated proceedings based on the lawsuit of Nikola Petrović, the former director of Elektromreža Srbije and godfather of Aleksandar Vučić, against KRIK. In May 2023, Petrović sued this investigative portal over the article “The President's Godfather Had a Company with Markos – A Criminal Involved in International Cocaine Smuggling”.

The trial had reached its conclusion, but yesterday, instead of closing the debate, Judge Nataša Jevđenijević decided to re-hear both parties.

“I have reviewed the case files, and I need the parties to answer a few questions,” said Jevđenijević, requesting that evidence be reintroduced by hearing both the plaintiff Petrović and the KRIK journalist.

This decision was made at the request of Petrović's lawyer, Đorđe Kurdulija, who demanded it, among other reasons, due to the change of judge in this case.

The KRIK defense opposed this, arguing that it is not standard practice in court to conduct re-hearings after a change of judge, nor is it a legal obligation.

However, the judge rejected their proposal to close the debate and issue a ruling, scheduling a new hearing for January 28. Nikola Petrović is expected to testify again at that time.

PREVIOUS RULING OVERTURNED, JUDGE PROMOTED

The ongoing proceedings are being repeated after the previous judge, Milena Vasić Pejčić, ruled in favor of Nikola Petrović in the first round of the trial. As KRIK reminds us, the plaintiffs did not dispute any of the claims in the article itself except for the title: they argued that it is not true that Petrović collaborated with a criminal, as Stanimirović was neither charged nor convicted at that time. Petrović's lawsuit sought to have the article removed from the website, to prohibit further writing on the subject, and to demand 200,000 dinars for emotional distress.

The Appellate Court overturned the first-instance ruling in November 2025, reasoning that Judge Vasić Pejčić did not explain which parts of the title and subtitles were inaccurate, as well as what exactly in the article harmed Petrović's honor and reputation. The case has now been assigned to Judge Nataša Jevđenijević.

As KRIK reported at the end of last year, Milena Vasić Pejčić, who ruled in favor of Nikola Petrović, was promoted to judge of the Appellate Court after her ruling.

We remind you that at the previous hearing in early October, Nikola Petrović's lawyer, Igor Isailović, requested that the trial be postponed due to Petrović's obligations in other court proceedings.

KRIK's lawyer, Kruna Savović, opposed this, stating that the conditions for holding the hearing were met and that this was the second time Petrović's lawyers had requested a postponement. She assessed that the intention was to prolong the proceedings and requested the conclusion of the main debate.

THREE LAWSUITS BY PETROVIĆ AGAINST KRIK

In addition to this lawsuit, Petrović has previously filed two more against KRIK journalists.

The first time, he sued the journalists of this outlet over the article “Nikola Petrović and His Wife Own Two New Villas Worth Four Million Euros” for allegedly publishing personal data. The court ruled in favor of KRIK.

In the second criminal lawsuit, Petrović sought prison sentences for journalists Dragana Pećo and Vesna Radojević due to an investigation from 2021, which revealed that he had done business with businessman Stanko Subotić through an offshore company in Luxembourg, from whom he purchased an airline below market value.

The journalists were acquitted in January 2024, but that decision was overturned, and the case was returned for retrial. The case became statute-barred in 2025, before a final ruling was made.

Author: Nikolija Čodanović
Source: Cenzolovka