Readers who even follow social networks and the few remaining media that try to inform citizens about matters of public importance, must have noticed - let's call it that - the unusual behavior that Cadastre exhibits on the Twitter social network (you call it X, I won't).
In just one month, the Cadastre account on Twitter is managed to have a fight with several anonymous and public figures on this network, to insult some, to insinuate dishonorable actions to some, and generally to accuse them all of having "an active role in a campaign aimed at destroying the reputation of a state institution".
Cadastar told this journalist on Twitter that his request for access to information of public importance was not gathering facts but "an obvious attempt to market a campaign", implying that the journalist does not have journalistic ethics, and that - accidentally or intentionally - misinforms the public and damages the reputation of the state body.
It was not of great importance that for the aforementioned request, the Cadastre set the relevant law on its head and refused to provide information about illegal buildings without any arguments based on the law.
Coincidentally or not, those buildings were also - unfounded in the law - legalized, i.e. legalized.
Also, by accident or not, the Cadastre rejected the request in which one of such objects belongs to Aleksandar Šapić.
Absolute ignorance
But, as in other cases, when citizens on Twitter asked specific questions related to their cases, Cadastre pushed its point - that it is a highly professional, completely transparent and "institution of vital importance for our country and us citizens", and that they are plotting around them with the aim of destroying the Cadastre.
Because it is hard to imagine, but the attitude towards the media was even worse than towards the citizens.
In every address to journalists or the media, Cadastre was not ashamed to show absolute ignorance and misunderstanding of both the role of the media and their way of functioning.
Anyone who has just passed through a newsroom knows that the interlocutor cannot (nor, probably, did anyone think of it before the Cadastre) to ask the editor for "approval for journalistic questions", because, I guess, no editor in Serbia has ever given such approval . Nevertheless, that is what the Cadastre asked Igor Božić from N1.
Media interference
However, tweeting is one thing. It is quite another when the Cadastre starts to seriously interfere with the media and journalists in their work.
That's what just happened to your reporter.
I asked the Cadastre an extremely simple question: when was a legalized building in Vračar registered in the Real Estate Cadastre? I even gave them too long a deadline to respond - almost two whole working days, until Monday at 10 am.
Their answer confused me: they said that "the work of legalizing buildings is not within the competence of the Republic Geodetic Institute", and that the RGZ "is neither competent to answer, nor would providing an answer be in accordance with the law".
My initial "dumbness" was soon replaced by the realization that a professional, transparent and vital institution did not understand a simple question - they thought I was asking them when the building legalized, and not when that legalized building registered in the cadastre.
My God, whoever does that is wrong, I immediately sent them an explanation of where they are wrong, I even bolded the key parts of the sentence to make them more visible and so that they could more easily understand the already simple question.
However, the Cadastre did not stop at the first mistake. No, he wrote to the editorial office of BIRN and my editor, Milorad Ivanović, and complained about me - as if we were in the fifth grade of elementary school and one student sued another student.
What is the Cadastre complaining about?
He complains about my questions.
"We want to introduce you to the questions that the journalist of your portal asks the Republic Geodetic Institute. This is not the first time that Mr. Marković has turned to our institution in search of answers that are not within our jurisdiction, and in the case of providing the requested answer, RGZ would be breaking the law," writes Katastar, complaining.
"Regardless of the intention and motivation, such requests additionally burden our state body, wasting time and resources that could be used for issues that are in our domain. We want to warn you about this procedure so that together we can find a solution that will be in the interest of all parties", writes Cadastar to my editor and asks him to inform all journalists at BIRN, "and especially Mr. Marković", what are the responsibilities of RGZ a.
Lord, what do they do?
On that occasion, Cadastre also sent a link to the Law on State Survey and Cadastre - as if other laws of this country do not apply to them, but only this one on survey and cadastre.
I thought - see, a vital institution doesn't even know how to write a complaint professionally: they start their complaint with the desire to introduce my questions to my editor, but then they don't mention those questions anywhere; the only thing they managed to send was a link to the law.
I also thought, for the umpteenth time in the past month - gentlemen, what do they do and what do they spend public money and resources on. Due to such nonsense, BIRN readers will probably be deprived of information about when the aforementioned legalized building was registered in the real estate cadastre, which is not uninteresting in this case.
I know you are interested to know what the editor Ivanovic answered them. He told them to send me an answer by Monday at 10 am.
Admittedly, he managed to change my name to "Radomir" in one sentence.
Whoever works, makes mistakes.
Cadastral pearls from Twitter
In order for citizens to get an idea of what Cadastre does on social networks, here are some examples from Twitter:
"As the last barrier of legal security, we are faced with constant challenges and attacks from various interest groups that aim to undermine the material rights of citizens for their own benefit."
"When an unethically constructed question arrives from a journalist, with a clearly expressed bad intention, to which the answer is essentially not required because there is a prepared picture that needs to be shown, then we ask the editor for approval for the questions, not referring to the law but to ethics and responsibility".
"The principle of legal certainty, the foundation of the cadastre, faces challenges. Disinformation aims to instill doubt, directly threatening our real estate rights. Illegal speculators, corrupt individuals and organized crime are trying to undermine the stability of the system."
"Persons who often comment for N1, such as Rodoljub Šabić, Ivan Ninić, Marko Somborac, Ivan Marković and others, play an active role in the campaign aimed at destroying the reputation of the state institution".
"We publicly call on N1 to explain why the journalist Neda Vulović Obradović published the text without a response from the other party, although we were ready to communicate if she provided approval that her questions had passed the editorial check".
Answer to the citizen: "We are sorry if you unintentionally asked the question in this way, but a question formulated in this way is a typical example of provocation, and an answer is not sought, but a blanket criticism is presented."
"So, if you use the cadastre system in a wrong and unconscionable way, then don't ask about the cause of the problem of delay in solving it - you yourself are part of that problem".
"Whoever guesses who the admin is, gets a prize - admission to any service at the time he chooses! And if you, Bojana Maljević, win this challenge, we can together realize the "cadastral adventure" project, which will be far more popular than the one you proposed."
"Geozavod and Geodetski zavod are two different concepts, like Somborac and sombrero. Again, it is about ignorance and lack of knowledge of elementary facts".
"Mr. @pera_vampir, you discovered a hole in the pot."
"Our mission on social media is to be useful and informative, not to waste time responding to provocations or attacks by interest group bots."
Address to Ana Toskić from the organization Partners Serbia: "Dear, are you perhaps the expert from the Working Group who insisted on removing the norm on abuse of the Law? That's why now Mr. Radomir @radomir_martin can ask questions to a state body about how many employees play football or how many goldfish there are, and if he doesn't get an answer, will he be punished? Or maybe they misinformed us about your work contribution?”
Addressing cartoonist Mark Somborac: "When it comes to a serious and professional debate on real estate management, it takes a certain education and professionalism to understand the depth of the subject, which you seem to lack."
Address to the former Commissioner Rodoljub Šabić: "Dear Šabić, the expression 'Are you too, son Bruta?' ringing in our ears. 😊Real estate management and trading in adapted lofts are not the same thing."
"Republički geodetski zavod (RGZ) is transparent and open as a book, without any hidden secrets or exceptions."
"Digitalization allows us to distinguish knowledge from ignorance and wheat from chaff. An example of this is the lawyer Ivan Ninić, who has only two cases filed through the eSalter since its introduction, and has 10 posts on the 'X' network about the work of the RGZ, which indicates that he is more focused on marketing than on expertise in the field property-legal relations."
"Words are the single most powerful force available to mankind."
"Mistakes are part of human nature, and as David Cottrell wisely notes: 'Mistakes are natural, but failure to admit them reflects a lack of integrity and courage.'"
Addressing the editor-in-chief of Južni Vesti Milan Zirojević: "By trying to cover up the omission, by claiming that they wrote about 'cadastre' with a small 'k', he not only showed disrespect for the facts, but also masked his responsibility with nebulous semantics."
Also to Milan Zirojević, albeit not on Twitter: "Dear Sir, this is the last warning to publish the response of the RGZ that we sent you on 22.02.2024/14/XNUMX. at XNUMX pm."
"Soprano, a quote from The Godfather - haven't you overestimated yourself a little, editor of Southern News?" If you think you can tell lies like in some gangster movie without consequences, we inform you that this is not a movie but the real world where you have to obey the laws."
"In our country, it is normal that when the cadastre is mentioned, it is actually confused because the registration system is not understood. If the lady shows that it is normally public on the social network, she will get a free vacation."
"Mark Twain said, 'People usually boast of their lies, but hide their stupidity.'"
Epilogue
The cadastre, after pointing out what the real question is - still answered.
He provided the requested information but, in his style, added a few more layers: "We would like to draw your attention to the fact that the wording of your query has intentionally or unintentionally created some confusion regarding the information requested." From your question, it was possible to understand that you were interested in the process of legalization of the object, which was not your intention, but we understood that way because we receive many inquiries about that topic, which is not within our competence. Grammatical structure and precision in asking questions are of key importance in order to avoid possible mistakes when answering and to make communication as clear and efficient as possible. Please pay attention to the way you formulate your inquiries in the future, so we can avoid potential misunderstandings."
The last paragraph was added to the text after the response from the Cadastre.
