The lawsuit filed by Milan Radonjić against Aleksandar Olenik has been dismissed.

In the reasoning of the verdict, Judge Vera Sredojević concludes, among other things:

“…In a situation where there is a court proceeding that has attracted significant public attention, such as the murder of Slavko Ćuruvija, there is a strong public interest in information related to the workings of the judiciary and the participants in such cases. The publication of information regarding the connection between the judge and the former head of the State Security Service, if true, may be significant for the public in the context of the perception of the independence and impartiality of the court. The content of the disputed publication undoubtedly indicates that it primarily addresses the alleged connection between the judge and the former head of the State Security Service; consequently, the primary aim of that publication is to criticize or question the integrity of the judiciary, rather than directly defame the prosecutor. Although the prosecutor is mentioned in the context of the acquittal for the murder of Slavko Ćuruvija, that mention serves as an illustration for a broader claim about the judge. The information about a potential connection of the judge with someone from the former State Security Service in the context of a high-profile trial is of exceptional public interest. Citizens have the right to know whether there are circumstances that could affect the objectivity and independence of the judiciary. In this regard, the prosecutor is mentioned indirectly as part of the facts that provide context for the claim about the judge. According to the court's findings, the primary aim of the publication is not to falsely portray the prosecutor as a murderer, but to highlight a potentially controversial connection of the judge. The fact that the prosecutor has been definitively acquitted is an important detail, but that fact alone does not mean that mentioning that context is aimed at harming his reputation, especially when the publication focuses on a third party (the judge). In a democratic society, freedom of speech and the media includes the right to critically examine the work of public institutions and holders of public functions. Judges are holders of public functions, and their work is subject to public criticism. Information concerning their objectivity and integrity, particularly in relation to significant judicial processes, is generally considered to be of public interest. Although the prosecutor is mentioned in an unfavorable context ("Acquitted murderer S.Ć."), this is a secondary effect of the publication, whose primary focus was on another individual and matters of public interest. Furthermore, the prosecutor, who bears the burden of proof under Article 231 of the Civil Procedure Act, has not proven that the disputed publication has actually harmed his reputation and honor. A mere subjective feeling of being offended is not sufficient; he had to demonstrate that the publication resulted in an objective reduction of his reputation in the eyes of the community or the public, as well as that the primary intent of the publication was to portray him as a murderer and thereby cause him harm, rather than to criticize the judicial system or the judge. Although the prosecutor was acquitted, he was a participant in a high-profile court case that attracted public attention, and his connection to that event, although he is not a public official, places him in a position where the public has an interest in information about this case…”

This is a first-instance decision. Against attorney Olenik, both Ratko Romić and Miroslav Kurak have filed lawsuits, who were also tried for the murder of journalist Slavko Ćuruvija and who, in two first-instance verdicts, were sentenced, along with Radomir Marković, the head of the State Security Department, to a total of 100 years in prison, only to be acquitted by the Appellate Court after nine years of proceedings. The three of them then filed more than twenty lawsuits, including lawsuits against the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation, established by the children of the murdered Slavko Ćuruvija. This is likely the largest series of lawsuits with elements of SLAPP in Serbia (as many as 22) aimed at silencing reporting and debate on this controversial trial and the unacceptable relationship between the judiciary and the State Security Service, or BIA, as pointed out by attorney Olenik.

The next hearing on the lawsuit filed by Radonjić, Romić, and Kurak against the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation is scheduled for Monday, June 23, also at the Second Basic Court in Belgrade.

Veran Matić, President of the Board of ANEM

The full text of this important verdict can be read on the portal Javni servis.