In addition to these, KRIK has over 15 active cases that have the characteristics of SLAPP lawsuits. For articles that have received professional awards and recognitions.

… 

Preliminary hearings in lawsuits for damages are generally formal and tedious; journalists rarely attend them, not even the parties involved, as was the case yesterday. I decided to follow this case along with my colleague Marija Babić from the Independent Journalists' Association of Serbia, because there is an ongoing frontal attack on the KRIK editorial office, the second lawsuit from former director of Infrastruktura železnica Jelena Tanasković, who is under house arrest due to accusations related to the collapse of a railway station canopy in Novi Sad that killed 16 citizens.

I find it interesting that this lawsuit for damages is related to the report on the first lawsuit. For journalistic work that represents a flawlessly written news piece. Professionally and ethically clear.

I decided to attend this trial precisely because it seems to be a very clear case of a SLAPP lawsuit, one that aims to intimidate and prevent journalists from continuing to investigate a certain individual and event.

KRIK journalist Bojana Jovanović reported on Jelena Tanasković's second lawsuit, in which her legal representatives claim in the lawsuit that the journalists "continued to criminalize the plaintiff, using the method of media 'spin.'” Such an act, as defined, does not exist in our laws. Nor was any kind of spin used.

In the text by Sofija Parojčić, Jelena Tanasković sued KRIK again, it states that Tanasković filed the second lawsuit due to an article that KRIK published about her lawsuit regarding an investigative piece Jelena Tanasković – Criminal Complaint for Which She Was Not Prosecuted, claiming that her honor and reputation were harmed.

“In the new lawsuit, Tanasković states that we portrayed her as a 'murderer' because we wrote in the news that the canopy killed 15 people. However, at no point in the text did we say that Tanasković was accused or suspected of murder, but rather that she is one of the suspects in the case of the canopy collapse in Novi Sad.

Moreover, she claims in the lawsuit that she was portrayed as a 'criminal engaged in corruption' because, as she explained, KRIK deals with topics related to organized crime and corruption.

“Considering the description of the goals and the very name of the media publisher 'KRIK', that is, the meaning of the name 'KRIK' – crime and corruption, it is clear that this contested article portrays the plaintiff as a criminal engaged in corruption,” the lawsuit states.

With the new lawsuit, as with the previous one, Tanasković is seeking one million dinars from KRIK.

“In the lawsuit, she does not specify what is allegedly inaccurate in the text, which confirms our position that she files lawsuits to intimidate us and stop us from reporting on her and topics important to all citizens,” says Dojčinović.

“I assume she will also sue us for this text, continuing the endless series of lawsuits because we must inform readers that we have been sued.”

The SLAPP nature of this lawsuit is evident from the assertion in the lawsuit where arguments from the first lawsuit are used as the keystone argument in the second lawsuit.

“In this way, the defendants claim that the plaintiff, thanks to her acquaintance with the husband of her friend Irena Vujović, managed to have the subject complaint dismissed and was unlawfully released from investigation and criminal proceedings…,” the lawsuit states, regarding a text in which this claim does not exist.

Although this was a preliminary hearing where the defendants and the plaintiff do not have to be present, the presence of court security in front of the courtroom was emphasized, which had not been the case in proceedings against KRIK before. I duly accredited myself, requesting permission to photograph in front of the courtroom. The plaintiff's attorney asked the judge to verify whether Marija Babić and I have accreditations, she in her capacity as a member of the public and I, duly accredited.

However, the story is spectacular that KRIK is actually attacking with its name and definition as stated in the indictment: “KRIK” – crime and corruption, it is clear that this contested text portrays the plaintiff as a criminal engaged in corruption, while the defendants based such a characterization of the plaintiff on no evidence whatsoever, but rather on pure “spin” of facts that have no connection to one another.

The same argumentation is used by the representatives of Judge of the Appellate Court Dušanka Đorđević and her husband. The very name KRIK and the mission of this editorial office is automatically an accusation against them. Imagine all those whom KRIK has ever mentioned in its articles, hundreds of them, suing simply for being mentioned in a media outlet that deals with exposing crime and corruption. I see this not only as SLAPP lawsuits but also as direct violence against freedom of speech, abuse of power, and threats to freedom of speech and media. In this moment, which is defined as the most difficult for freedom of speech in Serbia.

The fee that the defendants have to pay for such a high damage claim even before a verdict is pronounced is substantial, especially when there are numerous lawsuits. And when they have to pay the journalists themselves. And when you multiply that by the number of lawsuits I mentioned in the introduction, just for the month of June, it represents systemic suffocation of the media. And that is why solidarity is extremely important, both in monitoring the trials and in providing financial support—our personal, civic support, on which the survival of the media depends. If we want the stories we read on the KRIK website, then we will do everything to ensure that this editorial office survives. If we don’t want that, then it says more about us.

The court has decided that the first-instance proceedings will last two years and four hearings for this process. And again, imagine 19 such proceedings and you understand why these processes are interpreted as SLAPP. To prevent you from doing anything else except being harassed in the courts through SLAPPing as the KRIK editorial office.

Source: Javni servis