Judges of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade have issued a final ruling against a KRIK journalist and editor for publishing a news article about the trial of Zoran Jotić Jotka’s criminal group. The report cited an intercepted conversation between members of this criminal group mentioning then-BIA (Serbian Security Intelligence Agency) Director Bratislav Gašić. The judges argued that journalists should have been more tolerant toward Gašić precisely because he was a high-ranking official leading the BIA. They also stated that journalists are only allowed to report information but not to explain to readers what is happening. “Given that we were sued by one of the key officials of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), a man who seems to be more powerful than the courts, it is no surprise that we lost this case,” said KRIK editor Stevan Dojčinović. “What is most disturbing about this ruling is that it attempts to censor and control the media, reducing them to mere mouthpieces for what Serbia’s institutions and authorities say.”

By: Bojana Jovanović

Although it is a well-established rule worldwide that public officials must have a higher tolerance for criticism, judges in Serbia do not always agree.

The panel of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, presided over by Jelena Stojilković, ruled against KRIK’s journalist Milica Vojinović and editor Stevan Dojčinović, stating that journalists should have been more tolerant toward Gašić because he was the director of the BIA.

“This is a public official serving as the director of the Security Intelligence Agency, from whom the public expects high moral and professional competence, which amplifies the negative impression an average reader may form when reading the article,” states the ruling against KRIK in the lawsuit filed by Bratislav Gašić.

However, this is not the only controversial aspect of the case.

KRIK was convicted for quoting an intercepted phone conversation of a member of Jotka’s notorious criminal group, in which Gašić was mentioned as being “on the cauldron” (Serbian slang for being “on the payroll”) of Jotka. KRIK explained in the article that in this context, the phrase “being on the cauldron” (originally “na kazanu”) means that someone is one someone’s payroll.

The court, however, ruled that this interpretation was incorrect but did not provide an alternative explanation of what the phrase could mean.

“An average reader cannot conclude that the phrase ‘being on the cauldron’ means that the plaintiff was receiving payments,” the ruling states.

From the ruling, it appears that the judges believe journalists should only quote what they hear in court without explaining or contextualizing the information for readers. This goes against the fundamental role of the media in any democratic society.

“There was no need for the journalist to provide their interpretation of the phrase ‘being on the cauldron’ when reporting on court proceedings,” the ruling states.

The ruling also falsely claims that KRIK did not distance itself from the intercepted conversation it cited in the article—despite the fact that KRIK clearly stated that the words were those of a defendant and that they were reporting what was heard in court.

“The defendants base the truthfulness of the published information on an audio recording played during the main hearing at the Higher Court in Belgrade. However, the truthfulness of the information cannot be determined solely based on this, as the audio recording is just one piece of evidence in the trial of the accused Zoran Jotić,” the ruling states.

With this reasoning, the judges mislead the public into believing that KRIK journalists claimed Gašić was paid by the mafia rather than simply reporting on courtroom proceedings.

KRIK will have to pay Gašić around 140,000 dinars (approximately 1,200 EUR).

KRIK’s lawyer Kruna Savović warns that the ruling sets a dangerous precedent.

“The court’s decision carries a dangerous message: the private interests of a select few are placed above the public interest. According to the court, KRIK’s article constitutes ‘criticism that exceeds acceptable limits.’ If there is a boundary of acceptability, it is clear whose interests journalists are expected to consider. Certainly not the public’s.”

President of the Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (NUNS) Željko Bodrožić states that the ruling demonstrates the judiciary’s subjugation to the executive branch and the inability of judges to rule independently.

“These lawsuits are one of the ways independent journalists are pressured. Through legal means, they aim to prevent us from openly reporting on cases we investigate. We are not stenographers or passive channels for information—we provide context based on our research and the connections we uncover.”

KRIK will now take further legal steps—requesting a review of the ruling before the Supreme Court and filing a complaint with the Constitutional Court.

Newsroom Swamped by Lawsuits

This ruling follows a lawsuit filed by Gašić in May 2021 for defamation and reputational damage.

KRIK journalists accurately reported on intercepted conversations from the trial of Kruševac criminal Zoran Jotić Jotka, in which one of the accused stated that Jotić had nothing to worry about because “Gašić is on his cauldron.”

In addition to faithfully quoting the conversation, KRIK explained that the phrase “being on the cauldron” means receiving money. The journalists also attempted to contact Gašić before publishing the article, delaying its release to allow him time to respond. He did not provide a comment before publication nor issue a denial afterward. In court, he refused to answer KRIK editor Dojčinović’s question about whether he knew Jotka.

KRIK was initially convicted in the first-instance ruling by Judge Nataša Petričević Milisavljević, whose husband is the dean of the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law and a longtime friend of prominent SNS member and Minister of Labor Nikola Selaković.

The Court of Appeal overturned this ruling and ordered a retrial. In the retrial, Judge Nebojša Đuričić again ruled in favor of Gašić, and this ruling has now been finalized. The final decision was made by a panel presided over by Jelena Stojilković, with members Snežana Marjanović and Dragana Marčetić. KRIK will have to pay Gašić approximately 140,000 dinars (1,200 EUR).

This is the third definitive ruling against KRIK. Previously, KRIK was found liable in lawsuits filed by the heads of the Police Witness Protection Unit for reporting that they had sued KRIK, and by Predrag Koluvija, who is on trial for organizing a group that cultivated over 1.5 tons of marijuana. Koluvija sued KRIK because he was referred to as an “accused narco-boss” in a report on his trial.

KRIK’s newsroom has been overwhelmed by lawsuits in recent years, which the organization considers SLAPP suits—lawsuits designed to intimidate and exhaust journalists while censoring their investigations.

Currently, KRIK is facing 19 ongoing lawsuits. Plaintiffs include Koluvija, police officers, President Vučić’s best man Nikola Petrović, former state secretary Dijana Hrkalović (who was convicted at the Special Court for Organized Crime), and Jelena Tanasković, acting director of Serbia’s Railway Infrastructure, who is accused in the Novi Sad canopy collapse case.

KRIK is facing numerous pressures and needs help! Donate to KRIK and help us continue to resist pressures and investigate crime and corruption! More about how to donate can be found here.