A "Serb-hater", a "big traitor", a person who "leads terror" - this is how the editor of the website News Andrijana Nešić called a lawyer Zdenko Tomanovića. Because of these insults, the judge of the First Basic Court sentenced her to a one-year ban on work and a fine of 450.000 dinars.
It is very important to indicate that this is only a first-instance decision against which the accused will probably protest, so it is important to wait for the final verdict. Certainly, this existing one caused an explosion and a barrage of dissatisfaction in the pro-regime media, as well as from the highest state leaders.
Nevertheless, lawyers who deal with media law explain to "Vreme" that one should be very careful with this case. The first-instance verdict also comes at a time when certain cases against independent newsrooms are ongoing, in which the defendants demand that the journalists - in fact - be banned from working.
"Although it is completely clear that the violation of the code of ethics, legal norms, as well as any insults and slanders are absolutely against the profession and public responsibility of journalists, we believe that the imposition of such a measure prohibiting the performance of journalistic work can have serious and long-term consequences for freedom of expression and freedom of the media," explains Marija Babić, NUNS lawyer, for "Vreme". "Such measures can especially affect investigative media, which already work in difficult conditions and are often exposed to pressure precisely because of the topics of public interest that they open up."
Journalists should expand the field of law, not narrow it
Recently, we have witnessed that requests for such measures appear precisely in relation to journalists and newsrooms engaged in investigative journalism. The state, in particular, is trying to shut them down with numerous lawsuits that should exhaust them financially so that they give up writing further.
Therefore, there is a real danger that this practice will turn into a mechanism for narrowing the critical and controlling voice in society.
"From the point of view of the protection of freedom of expression, the direction that society should consider going is the decriminalization of the act of insult, and not the creation of a practice in which journalists are prohibited from carrying out their work. Such measures are not only not a solution, but can seriously threaten freedom of expression, media freedom, the independence of journalists and the right of the public to be informed," adds Babić, who states that it is necessary to regulate the media scene in order to strengthen professional standards and not narrow rights, primarily through stricter and more transparent control over the distribution of public funds.
NUNS: Banning the editors of "Novosti" is a dangerous precedent
Who will report it?
Prohibition of activities due to the criminal offense of insult is not a common practice in the judicial interpretation of our media laws in the last 15 years, and the question of how it will be implemented is also a big one. This measure is not imposed on "Novosti", but on the defendant, so the editorial office will not be obliged to respect it, but Nešić herself.
In practice, this means that the accused, in the event that the judgment is final, would have some kind of ban that can be interpreted by analogy with a restraining order. In the specific example, she would be prohibited from accessing the editorial site. However, it is a matter of control and who would supervise it. Because there is a possibility that they will just throw it out of the imprint and continue as before, so then it would be necessary for one of the colleagues to report it.
Some former employees of this company have publicly expressed their opinion about editor Nešić, calling her on social networks "an editor who is the embodiment of everything that should not be in journalism", as well as a person whom the regime "brought to destroy Večernje Novosti and drive away everything that was worth". For a long time, she was talked about among the workers as an employee "from above" who was brought in, but not chosen by the editorial staff. However, the question is whether among the employees of this company there are people who would report it, if it ignores the court verdict.
State and tabloids: "Anti-Serb harangue"
"If the blockaders came to power, journalists would be hanged at Terazije - the people would be out of work", this is how Nešić commented on the court's decision for Kurir. It was especially emphasized that the court in the case publicly supported the student struggle.
Siniša Mali called the judge's verdict "a direct institutional pressure of the judiciary on people who do their job, not because of a professional mistake, but because someone did not like her texts". Vojislav Šešelj said that "it is obvious that a significant part of judges is involved in anti-Serb and anti-state harangue".
"I have a lot of experience with such judges, they judge me all the time and I will soon publish a book entitled - Which Serbian judges are intellectual miseries and moral freaks. For years, I have been receiving only 2/3 of my pension because 1/3 goes to repaying the compensation and punishments they impose on me. In that book, I will create a characterization of all those judges and brand them for all time," Seselj told Novosti.
The Ministry of Information and Telecommunications also announced, which says that it is "clearly and unequivocally" about a "political verdict and hijacked justice".
"This is a draconian sentence that has not happened since the period of the criminal NDH from the Second World War. What is worrying is the fact that even the so-called greatest fighters for the rights of journalists, UNS and NUNS, did not react to this shameful verdict of judge Tatjana Bezmarević Janjić from the First Basic Court in Belgrade," the Ministry stated.
The same ministry states that UNS and NUNS "refuse cooperation with state institutions" and that "they are only interested in state money".
