Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

MEDIA DEPARTMENT

Media freedom in Serbia in 2008

Belgrade, 2009. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Mission to Serbia Media Department April 2009 Belgrade

Authors Miroslav Janković Centre for Political Studies of the Institute of Social Sciences (Dr Dragomir Pantić, Dr Jovanka Matić and M.Sc. Zoran Pavlović)

The views expressed by the autors in this publication are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of OSCE Mission to Serbia

Proofreading Marcus Tanner

Translation Vladimir Brašanac

Covers Design Dušan Grubin

Preepress COMMA | communications design, Beograd

Printing by SGR Original, Belgrade

We would like to thank our partners for their collaboration Centre for Political Studies of the Institute of Social Sciences

Print run: 100 copies

ISBN: 987-86-85207-40-2 Copyright© The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe

www.osce.org/serbia  2|3

CONTENTS I SUMMARY 5 II INTRODUCTORY FRAMEWORK 9 III TABLE OF ATTACKS ON JOURNALISTS IN 2008 11 IV DEATH THREATS TO VUKAŠIN OBRADOVIĆ 13 V OVERVIEW OF INCIDENTS 17 A. Physical attacks on journalists and their property 17 B. Threats, verbal assaults, pressures and other actions preventing journalists from performing their duty 46 C. Court rulings against journalists 70 VI MEDIA RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN SERBIA 73 A. Perception of general status of media rights and freedoms 81 - General assessment of the state of media freedom 81 - Enjoyment of media rights and freedoms in practice 82 - Media freedom, legal regulations 83 - Institutional guarantees of media freedom 84 - Comparisons with neighbouring countries 85 B. Perception of factors related to media freedoms and most frequent forms of threats to media freedoms and rights 87 - What the state of media freedom depends on 87 - Who undermines media freedom 89 - Forms that violations of media freedom take 90 - Ways to advance media freedom 92 Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

C. Violation of media freedom and rights in 2008 94 - Violations of media freedom in relation to coverage of the Kosovo issue 95 - Violations of media freedom in relation to the reporting of other issues 98 - Reasons for attacks on media outlets in relation to other issues (other than Kosovo) 99 - Protective measures against media freedom and rights violations 100 - Consequences of attacks on media 104 D. Media freedom and rights violations in 2007 105 - Forms of violation of media freedom in 2007 106 - Comparison of the state of media freedoms in 2007 and 2008 107 VII BRIEF OVERVIEW OF MEDIA LEGISLATION 109 VIII CONCLUSIONS 115 IX RECOMMENDATIONS 119 X BIBLIOGRAPHY 121  4|5

I | Summary The results of a survey conducted by the OSCE Mission to Serbia (hereinaf- ter, OSCE) in 2008, in conjunction with the Centre for Political Studies and Public Opinion Research of the Institute of Social Sciences (hereinafter, the Institute), show that the change of regime in 2000 did bring about the lib- eration of the media sphere from total control by the regime and censorship. However, the conditions for full autonomy in the media and the enjoyment of media freedoms and rights, i.e. the rights that the media and journalists exercise in the name of general public, still do not exist. The media system is characterised by a belated and incomplete process of transition, an acceler- ated pace of commercialisation in a cash-strapped and unregulated market, a drawn-out transformation of ownership, weaknesses in legal regulations and law-enforcement institutions, the modest financial power of the media, a low level of professionalism and a large number of attacks on journalists. In a va- riety of ways, these all have had an impact on the manner in which the media carries out its important social functions.

The principal objective of this survey has been to assess the real extent to which media freedoms and rights in Serbia in 2008 are threatened, i.e. to ex- amine the spread, forms, intensity and factors exerting pressure on the media and inciting attacks on, and threats to, the media and journalists. For the pur- pose of this survey, attacks on journalists and the media entail any violations of media rights and freedoms involving the use of force, as well as threats and various other types of pressure, motivated by the reporting of a particular media outlet or journalist, or by the very fact that the person assaulted is a journalist. The survey was divided into two phases.

Over the course of the year, OSCE researchers monitored and documented cases of attacks on journalists. The methodology used was based on field re- search. This meant direct contact with assaulted journalists and taking their Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

statements about the incidents, as well as daily monitoring of the media and the recording of all known incidents. The results of this part of the survey showed that in 2008, according to available information, 138 attacks on jour- nalists were reported in Serbia. Of this figure, 76 were physical assaults on journalists and their property, while 62 involved verbal attacks, pressures and various other attempts to thwart journalists in their efforts to carry out their assignments. Eight court rulings against journalists were also recorded. The figures pertaining to attacks on journalists in the course of this year are not final but these are the data that the OSCE managed to collect, using all the available information that could be obtained. The fact that some journalists are reluctant to go public with information on attacks must be taken into consideration.

The OSCE conducted the second phase of the survey in collaboration with the Belgrade-based Institute. As part of the poll, the Institute distributed questionnaires to 439 media outlets in Serbia (97 newspapers, 205 radio sta- tions and 137 TV stations), with the objective of assessing the perceptions of media editors and journalists who had been exposed to pressures, attacks or threats as regards the reasons for undermining media freedoms and rights, the possible consequences of the said pressures and attacks, and measures for the better protection of media freedoms in future. In the poll, 328 media out- lets replied but 22 were eliminated because they failed to meet the criterion for sample selection, which meant that the total number of the eligible replies received was 306.

According to the survey data, 80% of citizens and as many as 95% of journal- ists1 believe that there is control or censorship of the media in Serbia. How- ever, media freedom today is not in the spotlight as a social or professional is- sue. Several institutions and professional associations whose activity is, above all, focused on recording instances of media freedom violations and alleviat- ing their detrimental impact, are addressing this problem. The issue of media freedom is discussed in public solely on the anniversaries of still unsolved murders or attempted murders of journalists and in relation to the World Press Freedom Day. No domestic entity is engaged in systematic research into

1 Stretegic Marketing survey from 2007, Journalists and Journalism in the Eyes of Serbian Citizens and Journalists.  6|7

media freedoms and rights, hence, no comparative reviews in Serbia are avail- able of the state of media freedom over a longer period of time, including cases of violations, the most frequent forms of such violations, their perpetra- tors, etc. This lack of relevant sources undoubtedly limits the possibility of approaching this problem in a systemic manner, consequently resulting in the absence of a sustainable solution to the problem.

Whenever media freedom and attacks on journalists in Serbia are mentioned, we must recall the unresolved murders of Dada Vujasinović, Slavko Ćuruvija, Milan Pantić, and the unsolved attempt on the life of Dejan Anastasijević. As long as the perpetrators of these and many other unsolved crimes are not identified and brought to justice, there will be no media freedom in Serbia of a level that can be considered acceptable.

In this survey, media freedom entails freedom of expression, freedom to gath- er, publish and disseminate information, freedom of information flow and media openness to different opinions, freedom of editorial policy and media independence, right of access to information, right to monitor and criticise the government and public institutions and other professional rights of jour- nalists that do not undermine the rights and reputation of others, general security and public order.

The OSCE would like to thank all the contributors who have made this pub- lication possible, above all, the Institute, i.e. the research team consisting of the expert advisor and head of the Centre for Political Studies, Dr Drago- mir Pantić, expert associate Dr Jovanka Matić and researcher M.Sc. Zoran Pavlović, as well as Zlatko Minić and Anka Milošević, BETA news agency journalists and independent researchers involved in this project. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008  8|9

II | Introductory Framework The period under observation was marked by several important events. A presidential election in Serbia was held on 20 January2 with the run-off on 3 February3. In the first round, Tomislav Nikolić, as candidate of the Serbian Radical Party, and Boris Tadić, as candidate of the Democratic Party, won most votes (39.4% and 35.4% respectively). Since neither candidate won the support of more than 50% of the electorate, however, the two battled it out in the run-off4 in which Tadić emerged victorious with 50.5% of the votes, compared to 47.9% of votes cast for Nikolić.5

Dramatic events in the week when Kosovo declared independence on 17 Feb- ruary 2008, i.e. the protests against it, which were marked by various forms of violence, particularly violence against journalists, and which were unprece- dented in recent times in Serbia, thrust the issue of media freedom and rights before the attention of experts and the general public. Not only were journal- ists physically attacked and exposed to various open and anonymous threats but whole newsrooms were accused of “traitorous” actions by a variety of po- litical organisations and ideologically organised groups. Protests under the slogan “Kosovo is Serbia” were organised by the Democratic Party of Serbia and New Serbia, the then political parties in power, as well as by the Serbian Radical Party and others.

2 Election results for 2008, CESID, see the web page: http://www.cesid.org/rezultati/index.jsp .

3 Ibid.

4 Presidential election in Serbia, 20 January 2008, CESID, see the web page: http://www.cesid.org/rezultati/sr_jan_2008/index.jsp .

5 Presidential election in Serbia – run-off election, 3 February 2008, CESID, see the web page: http://www.cesid.org/rezultati/sr_feb_2008/index.jsp . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

The month of May was marked by early parliamentary and local elections6. In the 250-member National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, the most seats were won by the Democratic Party – 102, with the runner-up results as follows: the Serbian Radical Party – 78, the coalition of Democratic Party of Serbia and New Serbia – 30, the coalition of the Socialist Party of Serbia, the Party of United Pensioners of Serbia (PUPS) and the United Serbia – 20, the Liberal Democrat Party – 13, the Hungarian Coalition – 4, the Bosniak List for European Sandžak – 2, and the Coalition of Preševo Valley Albanians – 1.7 Several months later, the Democratic Party and the coalition of the Social- ist Party of Serbia, PUPS and United Serbia managed to form a parliamen- tary majority with the support of national minority parties, and consequently formed the new government of the Republic of Serbia.

The National Security Council of the Republic of Serbia on 21 July arrested the long-time fugitive Radovan Karadžić and handed him over to the Inter- national Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia in The Hague (ICTY). The Serbian Radical Party and New Serbia organised protests on 29 July in Bel- grade’s city centre against the arrest of Karadžić and clashes occurred between demonstrators and police. During those days, many journalist crews were at- tacked.

These events had a significant impact on the enjoyment of media freedom and rights in Serbia over the course of this year, perhaps a crucial one. Analy- sis of this survey results showed that each and every one of these events was marked by a large number of attacks on journalists, the incidence of which was much higher than the average number of attacks in the months when there were no such events.

6 See above, footnote 2.

7 Results of early parliamentary election in Serbia, 11 May 2008, CESID, see the web page: http://www.cesid.org/rezultati/sr_maj_2008/index.jsp .  10 | 11

III | Table of attacks on journalists in 2008 Data gathered by the OSCE in collaboration with its partners on attacks, threats and pressures on journalists show that over the course of 2008, jour- nalists experienced 138 attacks. Analysis of the information collected sug- gests that attacks were most intensive in those months when events of great importance to society were taking place, such as the presidential election in February, parliamentary elections in May, Kosovo’s declaration of independ- ence in February and protests in the wake of the arrest of Radovan Karadžić, the Hague indictee, in July. By far the most attacks occurred in February – 41, whereas fewest attacks were recorded in September – only two.

Physical assaults and Threats, verbal TOTAL attacks on property attacks and pressures January 5 3 8 February 35 7 42 March 2 7 9 April 4 1 5 May 7 11 18 June 3 8 11 July 11 8 19 August 3 3 6 September - 2 2 October 2 5 7 November 3 4 6 December 1 3 4 UKUPNO 76 62 138 Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008  12 | 13

IV | Death threats to Vukašin Obradović In early November, Vukašin Obradović, the owner of Vranje weekly Novine vranjske, received death threats8. Obradović, and other journalists on the weekly and those familiar with local situation in Vranje, claimed that the death threats were the consequence of a series of articles written by Obradović about clashes in the Vranje underworld and alleged collusion between organised crime and political centres of power. Obradović is one of the most reputable journalists in Serbia and the recipient of a number of journalistic awards, including the prestigious “Jug Grizelj”, “Dušan Bogavac” and “Stanislav - Staša Marinković” awards.9

The problems for Obradović and the staff of Novine vranjske started in 2003 when the weekly revealed a scandalous affair involving a Serbian Orthodox Church bishop, Pahomije, who was subsequently accused of sexually harass- ing underage boys. Novine vranjske received a threatening letter signed by the “Serbian Liberation Resistance Movement” and the “Serbian Liberation Front” which read: “You’ll lose your life over Albanians. We know you’re their mercenary and that you got things for your newsroom [from them], comput- ers… You are dragging Pahomije and the Serbian Orthodox Church through the gutter. We’ll chop off your head and kill your family unless you drop your allegations and apologise to Father Pahomije. You live in Serbia, you traitor-

8 Recurring Threats to Journalist, NUNS, 6 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=9974

9 Obradović without Permanent Protection, B92, 6 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=11&dd=06&nav_category=12&nav_ id=327495 Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

ous dog, but you’ll pay for dragging the Orthodox Church through the gutter. You and your family are condemned to death”.10

The weekly’s newsroom and offices have since been broken into three times, while unknown perpetrators once broke the windows of Obradović’s car.11 No perpetrators of these attacks or of threats against Obradović and the Novine vranjske newsroom have been identified.12

In a statement given to OSCE representatives, Obradović said he saw the threats and pressures to which he had been exposed as a consequence of Novine vranjske’s reporting on criminal structures in Vranje.13 One political party, following the publication of an article in which Obradović associated its political activities with the local underworld, brought charges at the local court, seeking millions of dinars in damages.14 Soon, Obradović started re- ceiving warnings from sources close to the underworld that he should “watch out”, as well as telephone calls from unknown persons threatening to “break his legs if he continued to write about those issues”.15 Obradović saw one threat sent to him through his young daughter as the most serious. Namely, in early November, unknown persons intercepted Obradović’s daughter on her way home from school and told her: “Your dad will be killed in 10 days”.16 As soon as his daughter passed on the message, Obradović reported the threat to Vranje police department, which said that everything would be investigat- ed.17

10 We Will Continue Writing about Crime in Vranje, NUNS, 7 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=9980

11 From the statement given by Vukašin Obradović to OSCE representatives on 18 November 2008. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

12 Ibid

13 Ibid

14 Ibid

15 Ibid

16 Ibid

17 Ibid  14 | 15

According to Obradović, however, Vranje police did not undertake any meas- ures until after the Independent Association of Journalists of Serbia (here- inafter NUNS) demanded that the Ministry of Interior provide protection for Obradović, his family and Novine vranjske newsroom.18 It was only then that police summoned Obradović for an interview, which he described as an informal conversation, as part of which the police offered security protection for his apartment and the newsroom.19 He also pointed out that he had never signed any paper as a statement made to the police, but that he saw one of the police officers writing down his words.20 The police never took a statement from Obradović’s daughter about the threats she had received. Vranje police department did not offer physical protection to Obradović until after he went public with the case, which then received coverage in all the major media outlets in Serbia. He refused an offer of police protection because, as he put it in his interview with OSCE representatives, “I wouldn’t feel comfortable walking in the company of police officers through my town where everybody knows me well.”21

In view of the threats made to Vukašin Obradović, Vranje police department issued a statement, declaring that all necessary measures to protect the per- sonal safety of Obradović and his family were being taken, but that no per- manent police security had been assigned to him since “he did not specify any explicit form of threats, hence there were no reasons for it”.22 Obradović claimed that he told the police explicitly about all the specific threats that he had received. A press release, subsequently published by Novine vranjske newsroom, read: “We are wondering why, then, the police have taken all the necessary measures to ensure the personal protection of the owner of No- vine vranjske and his family if, as the police announcement states, no spe-

18 NUNS Welcomes Police Protection for Obradović, NUNS, 6 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=9971

19 See above, footnote 10.

20 Ibid

21 Ibid

22 Obradović: Utterly Illogical Explanation, Danas, 6 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.danas.rs/vesti/hronika/dezurna/obradovic_potpuno_nelogicno_objasnjenje.47. html?news_id=144577 Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

cific proofs warrant it”.23 In a statement to the media, Obradović said that he did not request physical protection, but went on to describe the police’s public announcement as indicative, because it seemed “as if a recommenda- tion had been given to interested parties, essentially saying something like – Don’t go near his apartment or the newsroom, but he doesn’t have security, nonetheless”.24

As regards the police protection provided to him, Obradović said that police patrols were checking on his apartment and newsroom several times at night, going on to say that some policemen might be following him who were not visible to him, but that he did not notice or know anything about it. The at- mosphere in Obradović’s family has significantly changed for the worse since the last threats were received. Their lives are now full of anxiety, fear and ten- sion. In his words, this is particularly true in the case of his underage daughter who is very anxious and keeps asking if he really has to write about things that have prompted the threats. 25

23 Vranje: Police Ignore Threats, NUNS, 9 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=9985 .

24 Threats to Obradović’s Daughter: “Your Dad Will Be Killed in Ten Days”, Vranje Press Agency, 7 November 2008, see the web page: http://vranjepres.info/sh/1203/10/18722/?tpl=25 .

25 See above, footnote 10.  16 | 17

V | Overview of incidents

A. PHYSICAL ATTACKS ON JOURNALISTS AND THEIR PROPERTY

[ January ] 9 January – A group of a dozen unknown persons attacked TV Studio B jour- nalist Predrag Sarapa and the then presidential candidate of the People’s Peasant Party Marijan Rističević after the TV show Problem in which they had participated, while sitting in the Irish Pub in Knez Miloš Street, in Belgrade. According to Rističević’s statement, his assailants hit him after which he fell off his chair and hit the floor with his head. The Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Serbia (hereinafter MUP RS) issued a statement saying that Rističević and Sarapa were both “visibly intoxicated” at the time.26

14 January – Ivan Prodanović, a journalist on the magazine REZ, was attacked by an unknown person while gathering information at a business centre and shopping mall in Ustanička Street No 189, in the Belgrade suburb of Konjarnik, for an article that he was supposed to write. Prodanović gave the following statement about the incident: “I was attacked at work! That night, I went to see a friend, a former policeman, at the offices of his firm, which provides physical and technical security services, to work on a case. I wanted to write about war veteran invalids so my friend and I talked about it. On leaving the business centre, I was several metres in front of him. At some

26 Attack on Rističević and Sarapa, B92, 10 January 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=01&dd=10&nav_category=418&nav_ id=279858 . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

point, someone attacked me from the back and said, “Cut, cut the throat”. He mentioned the Church, but I cannot remember in which context, and hit me with his fist on the head, my arcade to be more precise, and then I fell down. My friend rushed after him and pushed him several metres further, but after the attacker fell down, my friend came back to me, to help me get up. The at- tacker had disappeared in the meantime. Then we went to the police so that I could give a statement”.27

17 January – Three unknown attackers beat up TV journalist and writer Đula Mirnić at Novi Sad railway station. The attack took place while Mirnić was waiting for a bus to take him to Bačka Topola and dictating a news item on his cell phone to his Hungarian-language newsroom. Mirnić told Magyar So daily the following: “A young man came up to me, smiling, but when I looked at him, someone hit me from the side with a rubbish bin. I tried to flee, but they knocked me down and kicked me mercilessly for minutes on end. Finally, they asked in Serbian where my briefcase was. A book and my wallet with a thousand or two thousand dinars were inside. But they didn’t take my expensive cell phone and wristwatch. I received countless blows, especially on the head. I’ve got a serious external scar, a wound on my forehead, and at least four bumps on my head. Also, my ribs, one eye and my head are hurting a lot.” After the incident, Mirnić asked a female clerk at the information desk to call the police. When the police failed to show up even after some 20 minutes had passed, Mirnić went to a police station on his own where he was interviewed and two police officers were dispatched to the scene of attack.28

18 January – Justin Vela29, a photographer/reporter covering the Serbian presidential election for World Picture News, a US-based news agency, was assaulted at a Belgrade bar in Knjeginja Zorka street. Three or four unidentified young men, each aged about 20, attacked him while he was talking with his colleagues from Britain and Russia. Vela briefly described the incident: “We were standing, drinking and laughing. At some point, I

27 «Punch because of an article on people with disabilities», ANEM, 19 January 2008

28 Robbery or Commissioned Crime, Danas, 25 January 2008, p. 33.

29 Justin Vela is a freelance journalist. You may find out more about his work at the following web site: www.justinvela.com .  18 | 19

felt a blow which knocked me down to the floor. While I was lying down, they were hitting me, until other guests at the bar stepped in and separated them from me”.30

23 January – A journalist and a cameraman of Novi Pazar’s Regionalna tel- evizija, Medin Halilović and Aladin Dazdarević respectively, were physi- cally assaulted while filming a protest meeting in the square between Novi Pazar municipality building and the Vrbak hotel, where a formal session of Novi Pazar’s municipal assembly was taking place to mark the official recognition of Novi Pazar’s status as a city. The police stepped in to protect the journalists and prevent more serious consequences after which a stone was thrown at them.31

[ Februar ] 17 February – In the aftermath of Kosovo’s declaration of independence, demonstrators and police clashed in Terazije, in Belgrade city centre. Protesters used stones, torches and concrete slabs against the riot po- lice. They shattered windows of a McDonalds restaurant in Terazije and tossed a Molotov cocktail inside to set it on fire.32 In the midst of the fra- cas, the demonstrators beat up a FONET news agency journalist, Ognjen Stevanović who was left with several swellings and bruises on his head and his body. Stevanović was intercepted by a group of hooligans who hit him and knocked him down to the pavement, and then kicked him while he was lying on the ground.33

30 UNS (Journalists’Association of Serbia) report on attacks and threats to journalists from the beginning of the year until August 2008 is available on at the following address: http://www.unsonline.org/index.php/IZVE%C5%A0TAJ-UNS-a-O-NAPADIMA-I- PRETNjAMA-NOVINARIMA-OD-PO%C4%8CETKA-GODINE-DO-1.-AVGUSTA-2008.html.

31 UNS Condemns Attack on Journalist and Cameraman, Press, 18 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.naslovi.net/2008-01-24/press/uns-osudjuje-napad-na-novinara-i-snimatelja/554100 .

32 Incidents, Brawls and Tear Gas on Belgrade Streets, Blic, 17 February 2008, see the web page: http:// www.blic.co.yu/politika.php?id=30816 .

33 Excerpt from Ognjen Stevanović’s written statement. The report is filled in the OSCE Media Department documentation Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

17 February – A Studio B television crew was attacked in Belgrade’s Republic Square while reporting on people’s reactions to Kosovo’s declaration of independence. Journalist Marijana Mitrović, who was at the scene as a Studio B crew reporter, described the incident: “Immediately after our live report for Studio B News at 7pm, out of the blue a group of young aggres- sive people, who had been pushed away from the Slovenian embassy at that moment bore down on the cameraman, his assistant, the technicians and myself. We were the only TV crew there and it was made clear to them we were from Studio B. They abused us verbally first, and then they attacked my colleague physically. They swore at us using various deroga- tory names, calling us traitors and mercenaries, and they destroyed a part of our equipment”.34

17 February – During the Belgrade protest, unidentified persons smashed the windows of B92’s shop in Makedonska street. Veran Matić, RTV B92’s CEO and editor-in-chief, said that as a media company, despite this inci- dent, B92 would continue to do what it had always done – report on all matters that the public had an interest in and a right to know about, and that RTV B92 would never yield to such pressure.35

17 February – In front of the US embassy in Belgrade, a Studio B television crew was attacked while reporting on the riots. Journalist and crew report- er Milana Mrkalj gave a statement describing the incident: “Apart from myself, a cameraman and his assistant were in the crew. The demonstra- tions unfolded peacefully, but after several hours in front of the embassy, the protesters were becoming more aggressive. They first started threaten- ing us verbally, and then physically attacked the cameraman. The Gendar- merie fended off the first attack, but when a group of a dozen youths at- tacked us for the second time, we had to flee to a private apartment. Before we fled, they hit the cameraman and his assistant a couple of times, while the man in whose apartment we stayed protected me personally. Apart

34 Excerpt from Mirjana Mitrović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

35 Frequent calls for lynch because of different attitudes, Blic, 22 February 2008, (http://www.blic.rs/politika.php?id=31419)  20 | 21

from my crew and myself, demonstrators were attacking anyone with a camera, regardless of whose sign was on the equipment”.36

17 February – A B92 journalist crew was attacked while reporting on demon- strations in Belgrade. Nikola Radišić, a journalist who witnessed the attack, described the incident: “During the protests against Kosovo’s declaration of independence on 17 February 2008, I was reporting on the rioting in the city. I was supposed to report live for the news at 4pm. Immediately before that, a crowd of hooligans came along and rushed towards the B92 crew among whom there was a Croatian female journalist. They were throwing stones and swearing at us… We managed to dodge the stones being hurled at us, but one piece did hit the camera, which was slightly damaged. A little later, while I was reporting from the streets, and we were in Terazije, police and demonstrators clashed. Several people were swearing at journalists, including ourselves, and a stone was thrown that landed near us. At that moment tear gas was fired, we started choking and had to leave”.37

17 February – Many Belgrade media outlets carried the news that another two journalist crews were attacked during the demonstrations: Palma plus TV crew and Croatia’s RTL television crew.38

17 February – Portuguese journalist André Cunha was attacked by protesters in the immediate vicinity of the St Sava cathedral in Belgrade. In his article published on his return to his home country by the Portuguese daily Dia- rio de noticias, André Cunha, described the attack: “While candles were burning brightly in front the St Sava Temple, a crowd of several hundred thousand people were chanting peacefully, ‘Kosovo is the heart of Serbia’. Had someone counted the candles? I wanted to do so, but I could not reach the temple as a young hooligan assaulted me near the United States embassy. Drugged or drunk, he was in the crowd, attacking the embassy. He hit me with a wooden baton on my hand two times, and then hit me on the back and upper arm. The TSF microphone fell to the ground. The same

36 Excerpt from Milana Mrkalj’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

37 Excerpt from Nikola Radišić’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

38 Hooligans attacked jouranlists as well, Politika, 18 February 2008, p. A8. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

hooligan had just smashed a window on a nearby car. Half of his face was covered. I only remember his eyes seething with rage. Fortunately, the riot police sprang into action at that very moment, and he fled”.39

17 February – During the riots in front of the US embassy, demonstrators attacked a Fox TV crew, but were rescued by Russian journalists who were on the spot. A group of attackers charged towards the Fox TV journalists when the Russian journalists told them to leave them alone because they were their colleagues. Police were nowhere near.40

17 February – A Večernje novosti photographer/reporter, Milutin Labudović, was beaten up in Belgrade in front of the US embassy while reporting on the riots taking place after the declaration of Kosovo’s independence. Labudović said: “As soon as I started taking photos, hooligans attacked the police and journalists like mad dogs. When they saw me holding a camera, they started yelling that they would beat me up, and everyone embraced that idea keenly, so I made a run for it. But I had nowhere to go. They started hitting me with all sorts of things. I tried to run away to- wards a police cordon, thinking I’d be protected there, but they continued to beat me one metre in front of about 40 policemen who were standing by and looking on. Then one of the demonstrators hit me with a stone on the head. I collapsed, barely conscious, in front of the police, got up and asked for help, extending my arm towards one of the policemen. Not even at that point did they help me, which made me feel more bitter than the injuries inflicted by the hooligans. Each and every policeman could clearly see I was on a journalistic assignment, that I was a photographer-reporter, because I had a camera with me”. Labudović sustained serious physical injuries. His teeth and parts of his jaw bone were fractured.41

21 February – On a YouTube web site, a video clip was posted on 21 February showing a sniper shooting at TV B92 news presenters Maša Mileusnić and Miša Stojiljković. The video clip starts off with dramatic music as a

39 Blood, Flames, Tears and Vito, Politika, 25 February 2008, p. A9, author André Cunha.

40 Excerpt from FONET journalist written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department

41 Excerpt from Milutin Labudović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.  22 | 23

background to pictures of stormy skies. Then a message appears on the screen, “Dark clouds are looming over Serbia! There is only one reason for it”. The next image shows sniper shots at B92 sign, and then at B92 presenters, 42after which blood gushes down their faces”.43 The author of this clip, signed as WerGoNy, posted a caption beneath the clip saying he was not a coward “because he was in war to defend Serbia”. He went on to say, “I’m not a rabble-rouser because I’m not forcing anyone to do it! This is only an artistic expression of my point of view. It’s something like Adem Jashari in Belgrade city centre.” 44The video clip was briefly removed from but re-appeared on YouTube on 1 March only to be removed again on 6 March.45

17 February – Alo daily journalist Bojan Radović was beaten up by the police while carrying out his journalistic assignment in Makedonska street in Belgrade related to the hooligan rampage from the US embassy to the city centre. Radović described the incident: “At one point, although the Gen- darmerie were involved in clashes with demonstrators, the special inter- vention riot police brigade came from the direction of the Republic square and started beating everyone in sight in Makedonska street, screaming savagely all the while. I shouted several times that I was a journalist, hold- ing up my press ID, but this didn’t stop two policemen from attacking and beating me. After several blows with batons to my body, they knocked me down onto the pavement where I lay for several minutes. After that, the police let go all those who were lying on the tarmac, clearly intending not to detain anyone. When I explained again to those same police officers, but now without their threats to beat me up, that I was a journalist, one of them said: ‘Fuck, bad luck’.” Subsequent medical examination revealed a rib fracture and numerous hematomas on the body.46

42 Open Letter of the Committee to Protect Journalists, CPJ, in Relation to Attack on B92 Media Company, NUNS News, see the web page: http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=8963 .

43 Recurring Lynch Mob Calls against Different Opinions, Blic, 22 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Ucestali-pozivi-na-linc-zbog-drugacijih-stavova.html .

44 Shot at B92, Alo, 22 February 2008, p. 2.

45 See above, footnote 17.

46 Excerpt from Bojan Radović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

17 February – Demonstrators attacked a TV B92 crew near the Albanian embassy in Belgrade and caused damage to their vehicle. Several hun- dred demonstrators gathered in the vicinity of the Albanian embassy in the Dedinje residential district. Strong police forces prevented them from coming closer to the embassy, while protesters were throwing stones and bottles at them.47 Enraged by their thwarted effort to attack the embassy, the demonstrators vented their anger on the TV B92 crew, throwing bot- tles and stones. Their vehicle was damaged in the attack, but cameramen and journalists were unhurt.48

18 February – On that day, the police were following a group of protesters who were marching from the direction of Nemanjina street in Belgrade, but when the police emerged from the Terazije tunnel, they immediately started to beat passers-by and people standing at a bus stop. Among them was a Pravda daily journalist, Željko Segić, who tried to show his journal- ist ID to a police officer but failed to do so as he was struck by a fist on his head, after which he collapsed to the ground.49

18 February – A cameraman and a journalist of TV Pannonija attempted to film the organised departure for Belgrade of football fans and other groups from Novi Sad, going to the rally against Kosovo’s declaration of independence. The group of football fans attacked them verbally, prevent- ing them from filming, and then threw bottles and waved flags threaten- ingly at them, after which both the journalist and cameraman fled.50

18 February – Several hundred secondary school students and football fans protested in Subotica city centre against Kosovo’s declaration of independ- ence. They smashed the windows of a McDonalds restaurant and four pas- try shops owned by ethnic Albanians. During the protest, demonstrators

47 Hooligans Clash with Police, B92, 18 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=18&nav_id=285256&nav_ category=640 .

48 Excerpt from Nikola Radišić’s statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

49 Punch for Pravda journalist, Pravda, 19 February 2008, p. 3.

50 Excerpt from TV Panonija editor’s statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.  24 | 25

chanted slogans against the ethnic Albanian, Croatian and Hungarian communities. No clashes with the police occurred.51 In the course of the riots, demonstrators attacked Subotičke novine weekly photographer De- jan Malagurski. According to Malagurski, he approached the head of the protest column and asked if he could take pictures of their protest. Young men from the column told him that he could not take pictures, and then one of them pushed him away.52

19 February – About 300 Užice residents, mostly secondary school students, protested in the city centre against Kosovo’s declaration of independence. During the protest, the windows of two banks and of the Idea Croatian supermarket were smashed, while the local headquarters of Liberal Dem- ocratic Party was attacked. Police monitoring the rally failed to respond to the incidents.53 Demonstrators threw stones at the police, shouting: “Go to Kosovo!”. They also threw stones at a TV5 ENG crew. No journalists were hurt during the incident. 54

19 February – On the day following Kosovo’s declaration of independence, a peaceful protest took place in Niš. However, demonstrations were also organised the next day in which several hundred secondary school stu- dents, football fans and others took part. Gendarmerie prevented protest- ers from coming nearer to the Merkator shopping mall, so the protesters threw stones, metal items and burning torches at them.55 During the dem- onstrations in Niš city centre, a group of protesters attacked a Niš TV5

51 New Riots, Police Arrest Hooligans, B92, 18 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=18&nav_id=285380&nav_ category=640 .

52 UNS in Subotica Reacts to News on Mosque Burning, Subotičke novine, 19 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.subotica.info/press.php?tag_id=103

53 Riots in Serbian Cities, B92, 19 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=19&nav_category=640&nav_ id=285477 .

54 Protests throughout Serbia, RTS News, 19 February 2008, see the web page: http://www3.serbiancafe.com/lat/vesti/14/45348/protesti_sirom_srbije?action=shownews&id=14 &topicid=45348 .

55 Niš: Police on Alert All Night, Blic, 19 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.blic.co.yu/politika.php?id=31007 . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

cameraman while he was filming their movement towards the Merkator mall. The cameraman sustained light physical injuries.56

19 February - Several thousand demonstrators from Leposavić and the north- ern part of Mitrovica, in Kosovo, gathered at the Jarinje border crossing on the administrative demarcation line between Serbia and Kosovo, between Leposavić and Raška. They first threw stones at border officials and then set fire to the facilities and vehicles of UNMIK, border police and cus- toms.57 While taking pictures of demonstrators, Glas javnosti and Kurir journalist Zoran Šaponjić was attacked by a protester who struck him with his fist on his head three times, which caused large hematomas on the back of his head.58 In his words, it was pointless to try to show his press ID so he fled the fury of the “enraged mob”, as he put it, throwing stones at him, and climbed a nearby hill. “Two masked men hunted me down on that hill and took away briefly my camera, threatening I’d fare pretty badly if their faces appeared anywhere in newspapers”, said Šaponjić.59

19 February – During the riots at the Jarinje border crossing, the demonstra- tors attacked another journalist –Večernje novosti’s correspondent from Novi Pazar, Miroljub Nićiforović. Attackers grabbed the journalist by his throat and tried to seize his camera.60

19 February – At Jarinje border crossing, almost at the same place where other journalists were attacked, Televizija Republike Srpske journalist

56 Riots in Serbian Cities, B92, 19 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=19&nav_id=285477&nav_ category=640 .

57 Border in Flames, UNMIK on the Run, Glas javnosti, 19 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.glas-javnosti.rs/clanak/glas-javnosti-20-02-2008/granica-u-plamenu-unmik-u- bezaniji?page=1 .

58 Samaradžić: Legitimate Actions, B92, 19 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=19&nav_id=285424&nav_ category=640 .

59 Journalists Attacked in Jarinje, 24 sata, 19 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.24sata.info/10237 .

60 Ibid.  26 | 27

and cameraman Vladimir Milaković was physically assaulted. Apart from Milaković, a Radio Kim journalist was also attacked. 61

19 February - In the riots taking place at the Jarinje border crossing, German TV ARD journalist Zoran Orlandić was attacked by demonstrators who pushed him to the ground and kicked him on his head and his body.62

19 February – In the same incident, Glas Juga journalist Ivan Vučković was also assaulted.63

19 February – At the Jarinje border crossing, TV Most journalist Miloš Savić was also attacked. 64

21 February – Radio Televizija Srbije cameraman Vladan Bugarski and his colleague Darko Vučević, a security guard at this media company, were attacked and injured near the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia in Belgrade. 65

21 February – Demonstrators attacked and beat up two Russian journalists near the US embassy – Russia Today TV producer Andrey Fyodorov and head of his team Andrey Pavlov. According to Fyodorov’s statement, dem- onstrators hit him savagely on the head, while the cameraman was severe- ly beaten.66 Russian satellite news channel Vesti 24 reported that the attack on the journalists ceased when they declared themselves to be Russians.67

61 Journalists Get a Bashing, Alo!, 20 February 2008, p. 2.

62 See above, footnote 33 (Samardžić).

63 Ibid.

64 Ibid.

65 Excerpt from RTS editor’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

66 Yesterday’s Riots: Day After, B92, 22 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=22&nav_id=285931&nav_ category=640 .

67 Tanjug news agency, 21 February 2008, see the web page: www.tanjug.co.yu/Dogadjaji/Protest/default.aspx . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

21 February – RTS cameraman Milan Ljubinković was attacked while filming demonstrations near the Belgrade University Law School. Various objects were thrown at him. Protesters swore at the rest of the RTS crew.68

21 February – Protesters verbally abused and pelted an RTS journalists’ crew with stones as they reported on demonstrations near Belgrade’s Slavija square.69

21 February – Demonstrators attacked an RTS crew reporting on the riots taking place at the corner of Kneza Miloša and Birčaninova streets in Bel- grade, while they were preparing a live report on the programme. Journal- ist Vesna Dragićević was pushed away and knocked down to the pave- ment. Cameraman Vojislav Đurović sustained several heavy blows to his head, ribs and legs as he was scrambling to protect his tripod and camera. Sound assistant Darko Glišić was also knocked down to the pavement as well as light technician Mile Ilić, who was kicked on his head and body. Their camera and tripod were destroyed in the process.70

21 February – Dutch NRC Handelsblad daily photographer Dirk-Jan Visser was attacked by demonstrators near the US embassy and sustained a se- vere injury to the chest. Describing the incident, he said: “I was in front of the US embassy, taking pictures of the unfolding events. At one point the crowd turned to three of my colleagues and myself. They managed to escape, I think, as I started running away and apologising to the people who were chasing me. A young protester continued to follow and shout at me. Others noticed and joined in. All of a sudden, they encircled me and all hell broke loose. They were hitting and kicking me all the time. Finally, some older people came up and got me out it, and there was an ambulance

68 Excerpt from RTS editor’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

69 Excerpt from RTS editor’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

70 Excerpt from RTS editor’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.  28 | 29

nearby”.71 The Dutch reporter was received at the Emergency Centre Sur- gery Department with three broken ribs and head injuries 72

21 February – Belgrade daily Alo photographer/reporter Miloš Perić was beaten up by police while he was trying to take pictures of the riots in Bel- grade streets. While taking a picture of an injured policeman in Neman- jina Street, another police officer came up to him and said, “What on earth are you taking pictures of?”. Then the policeman hit him with the helmet on the head and went on beating him with a baton.73

21 February – Near the Belgrade Emergency Clinical Centre, police attacked Belgrade daily Alo journalist Nemanja Kostić while he was trying to take photographs of a police cordon. Kostić showed his press ID to policemen but they ignored it and first tried to seize his photography equipment and then hit him with batons until he managed to get away.74

21 February – During the demonstrations in Belgrade, one of the protest- ers approached Leskovac weekly Naša reč photographer/reporter Jovica Smiljković, snatched his camera and then smashed it. This was the only camera that this media company owned.75

25 February – At Mutivode border crossing near Medveđa, demonstrators who were protesting against the secession of Kosovo from Serbia verbally and physically assaulted Milica Ivanović, correspondent of BETA news agency and of Blic daily. One of the demonstrators hit the journalist with a log and called her a traitor. Ivanović gave a statement describing the in-

71 Yesterday’s Riots: Day After, B92, 22 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=22&nav_id=285931&nav_ category=640 .

72 Destroying Belgrade, Večernje novosti, 22 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.novosti.rs/code/navigate.php?Id=14&status=jedna&vest=116586&datum=2008-02-21.

73 UNS report on attacks and threats to journalists from the beginning of the year until August 2008 is available on at the following address: http://www.unsonline.org/index.php/IZVE%C5%A0TAJ- UNS-a-O-NAPADIMA-I-PRETNjAMA-NOVINARIMA-OD-PO%C4%8CETKA-GODINE-DO- 1.-AVGUSTA-2008.html .

74 Ibid.

75 Naše reči Weekly Reporter Had His Camera Smashed, Blic, 25 February 2008, p. 2, author: M.Ž.I. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

cident: “A younger protester hit me with a wooden log while I was on the cell phone dispatching my report to BETA news agency, and I was holding a large notebook with Blic written on it in capital letters. Other colleagues heard my screams, but no one rushed to my aid. The whole incident, the blow to my leg and my argument with my assailant, was witnessed by sev- eral police officers. I turned to one for help and protection, but that po- liceman said he saw nothing, laughing in my face. Then I asked the police chief for help, but he said I should move away and stand next to the police officers, and then no one would dare touch me. Previously I asked the attacker why he hit me, to which he said: ‘Because you’re a traitor’. While arguing with him, several other demonstrators surrounded me threaten- ingly, so I was forced to seek police protection which I didn’t get”.76 The next day, BETA, Blic and NUNS sent a protest letter to the Ministry of In- terior, since the journalist had not received adequate police protection.77

25 February – RTV B92 cameraman and picture editor Milan Sokolović was given an assignment to film protests by football fans and army reservists in Niš, Medveđa, Leskovac and at Mutivode police checkpoint immediately after Kosovo’s declaration of independence. While undertaking his jour- nalistic duty, Sokolović was attacked twice. In his statement about these events, he said: “In Niš, in the central square and in front of the Merkator shopping mall, I asked my colleague from RTS, who was not at work that day, to come with me because I perceived that this would be a high-risk event. A group of football fans came from the back, swearing and calling me a mercenary, traitor and an ‘Ustasha’, and tried to get me. My colleague and I managed somehow to get away and hide in a nearby building. I was recognised asa B92 journalist in Niš, but in Mutivode they didn’t know who worked for B92 – this was the only television they bore a grudge against. MY colleague from FONET news agency told drunken reservists I was a FONET journalist so that I could continue filming them as they were shouting, ‘We’ll kick the shit out of this B92 cameraman bloke’.” As a

76 Excerpt from Milica Ivanović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

77 Ibid  30 | 31

result, Sokolović had to remove all RTV B92 signs from his van, camera, microphone and other pieces of equipment.78

28 February – In the aftermath of Kosovo’s declaration of independence, the number of death threats sent to B92’s CEO and editor-in-chief Veran Matić, reached a new height. The threats sent by e-mail from fictitious addresses included saying, “I’ll slaughter you, Ustasha”, “You’re still alive?”, and “You’ll get a bullet to your head… if you continue undermining the Serbian state. You’ll end up like stinking Đinđić – not only you but also many others who stand in the way of the Serb people”.79 In a protest letter from the Committee to Protect Journalists, CPJ, addressed to the Serbian state leaders in connection to the attacks on B92, the following threats to Matić were also quoted: “I’ve found out where you live so I’ll kill you soon”, and “Burn in hell if you you’re not at your television station when it is burnt down”. According to information in the possession of the CPJ, threats continued flooding in in February and March. Matić told the CPJ that it was hard for him to walk along the city streets as he would immedi- ately come across verbal threats and abuses once he ventured outside”.80

[ March ] 1 March – In the night between 28 February and 1 March, a hand grenade was thrown at the entrance door of Belgrade’s TDI Radio in Maksim Gorki street No 56. The radio station’s director, Ružica Krdžić, is also chair of the Belgrade Radio Station Association. In her statement to OSCE, Krdžić said: “I received direct threats on the mobile phone two days before the attack from a person using a hidden number who said, ‘If you want a war, you’ll have it! You know very well who we are and who stands behind us!’ I knew the threat message was coming from the people from a radio sta- tion operating for years as a pirate broadcaster, and which, for years, had

78 Excerpt from Milan Sokolović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

79 B92: Criminal Charges for Threats, B92, 25 February 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=25&nav_category=11&nav_ id=286344

80 Documents B92, 5 March 2008,www.b92.net/info/dokumenti/index.php?nav_id=287835 Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

interfered with our signal, which was why I had submitted 20 complaints to RRA and RATEL regulatory agencies. We also have a Serbian Supreme Court ruling against them, and all these threats culminated in a grenade being thrown at our door, which was meant to serve as a warning against our efforts to have them prosecuted”. The police conducted an investiga- tion at the scene of the incident, but there has been no official information yet as to whether the persons responsible for the attack have been identi- fied and brought to justice.81

31 March – After a football game in Čačak between local FC Borac and FC Partizan of Belgrade, Voja Radojević, an official of the Belgrade football club, attacked Kurir daily journalist Konstantin Radulović in an attempt to settle scores with him.82

[ April ] 12 April – Two Radio Televizija Panonija journalists from Novi Sad, Milan Antonijević and Biljana Gavrić, were assaulted in Novi Sad’s Freedom square while trying to film a clash between FC Partizan and FC Vojvodina fans. Hooligans beat up Antonijević, seized and destroyed his camera. A little later, his damaged camera was returned to him but without the taped material. 83

23 April – A Blic daily photographer and reporter, Jovan Jarić, was attacked in front of the Kolašinka restaurant in the Novi Sad suburb of Veternik. In Jarić’s words, Kolašinka owners attacked him while he was trying to take a photo of the building on account of a previously published story that re- vealed that the facility’s owners had been convicted of human trafficking. His assailants seized his camera and smashed the lenses.84

81 Interview with TDI Radio director Ružica Krdžić, 3 March 2008. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

82 Kurir Journalist under Attack, Kurir, 31 March 2008, http://www.kurir-info.rs/clanak/kurir-31-03-2008/napadnut-novinar-kurira.

83 Football Fan Knife Fight, Two Journalists Beaten, Politika, 13 April 2008, p. A1, author: S. Živković.

84 Condemnation of Attack on Blic Photographer/Reporter, 24 April 2008, http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Osuda-napada-na-fotoreportera-Blica.html .  32 | 33

27 April – In the Belgrade municipality of Voždovac, an incident between Aleksandar Tijanić, Radio Televizija Srbije’s general director, and Robert Tomaš, a member of Liberal Democratic Party election campaign team, took place. Tomaš said that it was by pure chance that he happened to be there, together with his wife, when he noticed Tijanić coming out of a florist. “I frowned and he noticed I had a grimace on my face, which was not particularly pleasant towards him. My wife told me to get into the car, and I said, ‘Fuck him’. He heard what I said and retorted, ‘Fuck your Čeda and Beba’. I replied in kind. He charged aggressively towards me, attacked and threatened me”. The RTS general manager claimed the opposite: “I was off to a family lunch and passed by a car in which a young man was leaning backwards,” explained Tijanić. “He called out to me, saying I’d pay for everything, and that we destroyed the state over Kosovo. I replied I was 30 years his senior, but he was getting into his car, which I perceived as a possibility that he might have some weapon inside. I rushed up to him and tried to keep him inside the car by blocking the door. He kicked me and I replied in kind.” According to the flower shop assistant, where Tijanić had just been, the incident occurred when Tomaš first swore at Tijanić: “I didn’t see if there was some fight, but I heard a man, sitting in a car, swear- ing at the RTS director, and then he responded.”85

28 April – During an interview conducted by Dnevnik daily journalist Snežana Nikolić with Social Democrat League of Vojvodina, LSV, chair- man, Nenad Čanak, the latter interrupted it by grabbing the dictaphone from the table, turning off the recording and taking out the tape, which he subsequently smashed in his hand. Then he tossed the smashed tape onto the floor, started waving with his walking stick and threw the journalist out of his house. In relation to the incident, Nikolić stated: “The question which I posed to LSV chairman was, ‘Mr Čanak, you’re saying, and you’ve made yourself clear, that these parliamentary elections are a referendum on Europe or isolation, which is why you rallied round the ‘For European Serbia – Boris Tadić’ election list. But it is unclear, and there’s ambiguity about it in public, whether you’ve also accepted the Democratic Party’s policy towards Kosovo by entering that coalition? I ask you this because Oliver Dulić, in an interview for our daily, said the moment you joined

85 Fight in Front of Flower Shop, Večernje novosti, 27 April 2008, (http://www.novosti.rs/code/navigate.php?Id=9&status=jedna&vest=120368&datum=2008-04-28 Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

the coalition, you also embraced the DS’s policy towards Kosovo, but this was subsequently denied by LSV deputy Aleksandra Jerkov.’. After a brief exchange as part of which I also asked him questions about the same sub- ject – the Kosovo issue, which I thought to be very important, and that the public was interested in it in the election campaign ahead of the polls on 11 May, the LSV chairman unfairly alleged I was trying to drive a wedge into the ‘For European Serbia – Boris Tadić’ election list, and that ‘these were methods that Vojislav Koštunica was using’. When he took the tape out of the dictaphone, I asked him to put it back and resume the interview. However, he wasn’t willing to do that.” A day later, at a press conference, Čanak said: “I apologise. I was in a bad mood a bit and, of course, I’m sorry that this actually happened. Yet, I don’t think I was so wrong. For someone to be a journalist, it isn’t enough to have a press ID. One must have profes- sional ethics. When ethics fail, unpleasant situations are bound to occur. As we reached a point where the interview became pointless, I didn’t want a scandal where there was no scandal at all.”86

[ May ] 4 May – In Mt Golija, unidentified persons damaged the transmission equip- ment of Regionalna televizija and Radio 100+ from Novi Pazar by cut- ting the cables, thus interrupting the broadcasting signal of these media outlets. In a statement given to OSCE representatives, Regionalna televiz- ija’s editor, Medin Halilović, said that there had been dozens of attacks on journalists and property of Regionalna televizija since 2004, adding that no perpetrators had been identified. Attacks, he added, usually take place during election campaigns.87 Radio 100+ editor Ishak Slezović told OSCE representatives that this radio was collateral damage in the attack which, in his view, had targeted Regionalna televizija, and was a consequence of the election campaign.88

86 Čanak Kicked out Dnevnik Journalist, Blic, 29 April 2008, (http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Canak-isterao-novinarku-Dnevnika.html)

87 Interview with Medin Halilović on 6 May 2008. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

88 Interview with Ishak Slezović on 6 May 2008. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.  34 | 35

4 May – The owner and editor-in-chief of the independent RTV TNT from Bela Crkva, Stefan Cvetković, was attacked by about 20 persons at the Gulašijada event (Goulash Fair) in the village of Dupljaja near Bela Crkva. Cvetković tried to film this group of people as they were taunting and swearing at the Social Democrat League of Vojvodina’s leader, Nenad Čanak, who was also present, but then some members of the group, after noticing that Cvetković was filming them, charged towards him, hit the camera with a bottle and hit Cvetković himself several times. Police soon came to the scene of the incident. Cvetković claimed the attackers told the police they were Serbian Radical Party supporters.89

6 May – At about 2.15pm, the office of Večernje novosti’s correspondent in Niš was attacked and a window smashed by a large stone wrapped in a yellow plastic bag. A note reading “Death to Fascism, Fuck Communism”, signed “Black Hand”, and addressed to the editor-in-chief, was found in the plas- tic bag, which also contained a flyer with a picture of a woman wearing a “šajkača” (traditional Serb national hat) and a caption “Šajkača – Serbian brand”. A company employee dealing with classified ads was sitting next to the window that was smashed, but was not injured in the attack.90 The very next day, police arrested Milorad Lazarević from Niš under suspicion of having carried out this attack. A local magistrate fined Lazarević 20,000 dinars for the offence.91

08 May – Unidentified persons cut a power cable in the vicinity of RTV Sokobanja’s transmitter, thus disrupting the broadcast while local mayor Miša Dinić was on the programme in a leased time slot. The station’s acting editor-in-chief, Gordana Stamenković, told Tanjug news agency: “In the late Nineties, our uplinks were seized and removed, cables were cut and our offices sealed, but we were convinced those times had long gone. The incident was reported to the police and an investigation is underway”.92

89 TNT TV Editor-in-Chief Attacked at Gulašijada, Danas, 5 May 2008.

90 Black Hand’ Threat, Večernje novosti, 7 May 2008, see the web page: http://www.novosti.rs/code/navigate.php?Id=9&status=jedna&vest=120697&datum=2005-11-24 .

91 Stone Thrown at Correspondent Office, Press, 8 May 2008, p. 16, author: D.K.

92 OSCE report on the incident, 9 May 2008, is filed in the OSCE documentation. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

17 May – A Subotica Gazeta correspondent happened to be at the scene of a traffic accident near Vetrušić on the old Subotica – Novi Sad road in which two persons lost their lives. While trying to take pictures of the scene of the accident, a policeman came up to him and started insulting and swear- ing at him. The policeman then seized his camera as well as personal and press IDs. This journalist said the following: “He came back later and told me to show him how to erase the photos. In the meantime, the investi- gating judge also came up to me, attacking me verbally and calling me a ‘mummy’ for taking pictures of corpses. The policeman who had seized my camera started erasing the pictures, including those that hadn’t been taken at the scene of the accident.” He went on to say that, at some point, news started circulating in the crowd that gathered there that a senior government official was responsible for the accident, and that “the police and investigative organs were very nervous because some journalist spoilt their plans”.93

19 May – About 50 supporters of a political organisation, Radnički otpor, (Labour Resistance) from Kragujevac, tried to force their way into the offices of Radio Televizija Kragujevac but were prevented from doing so by the police. They insisted that the station should take a statement from their leader in relation to alleged election fraud at some polling stations on the territory of the city. Several organisations and journalists; associations condemned this incident.94 In its press release, NUNS reiterated that “the editorial policy of a media company is solely under the competence of editorial staff, and that any attempt to influence the editorial policy from the outside amounts to pressure on the media and violation of media freedoms guaranteed by the constitution and law.”95

30 May – A Kurir daily journalist, V S, went to Novi Sad to investigate a story about the alleged illegal transport of transformers for Elektromreža Sr- bije, Serbia’s electric energy transmission and transmission system con-

93 VIP Traffic Accident!, Gazeta, 18 May 2008, p. 11.

94 Attempt to Storm TV Kragujevac, B92, 20 May 2008, https://xs4.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=05&dd=20&nav_id=299509&nav_ category=418 .

95 NUNS press release dated 20 May 2008, http://www.nuns.org.yu/aktivnosti/view.jsp?articleId=9224.  36 | 37

trol company. On behalf of Elektromreža Srbije, a Croatian company, Za- grebtrans, had subcontracted the Novi Sad-based firm Eurošped for the purpose. According to the statement of V S. Eurošped’s general manager approached him and said that he was not pleased with articles published by Kurir about this case, then pushed him away and made a gesture as if he was about to hit him, but stopped at that. 96

[ June ] 15 June – An unknown person physically assaulted and injured Televizija Vojvodina cameraman Bojan Dakić on Ribarsko ostrvo [a Danube River island] in Novi Sad while he was filming footage for a weather forecast package. Dakić told the children who were standing next to him, that they could freely bathe in the river and would be on TV weather forecast. An unidentified man then came up to him and said: “I was killing Shqiptars [a derogatory term in Serbia for ethnic Albanians] in Kosovo, and I haven’t come to Novi Sad to have my children provoked by strangers”. He hit Dakić several times on his face and body so that the cameraman had to seek medical assistance. After the attack, Dakić had to wear a cervical col- lar round his neck, and he also had swellings in the areas of his jaw and ribs.97

17 June – The bodyguard of the well-known musician Goran Bregović physi- cally attacked a Kurir daily woman journalist in the Belgrade Clinical Centre when she tried to enter a hospital apartment where the said musi- cian was recovering from an injury. One of Bregović’s bodyguards seized the journalist’s camera, threatening to “throw her out of the window if she continued to sneak around and take pictures in the hospital”. The journal- ist describes the incident as follows: “At around 1pm., without any prob- lems, we entered the building where Bregović’s hospital apartment was. When we tried to open the door of the hospital room, which no one had been guarding up to that point, an armed man in black T-shirt and black trousers appeared behind our backs. He grabbed me by the hand, dragged me out into the corridor, and started questioning me as to who I was and

96 Kurir Journalist Assaulted, Kurir, 31 May 2008, p. 3, author: E.K.

97 RTV Cameraman Beaten Up, Dnevnik, 16 June 2008, p. 8. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

what I was doing in front of that door. When he heard I wanted to see Bregović, he literally snatched my camera, erased all the photos, and yelled as if he’d just exposed dangerous terrorists, ‘You’re crazy! I can throw now both you and your camera out of the window. Don’t you know it’s forbid- den to take photos and sneak around the hospital?! What are you trying to do? You wanted to take pictures of Bregović, didn’t you? Get lost and I don’t want to see you here anymore! If you come back, I won’t be gentle like this’.”98

18 June – An incident between believers and clergy occurred at the Holy Trinity Church in Duškovci near Kragujevac in which a Dečja televizija journalist, who was filming the event, was physically attacked. Miodrag Gavrić, founder of Dečja televizija who witnessed the incident, said: “In the middle of the church, the priest Dmitar attacked the cameraman of Dečja televizija from Kragujevac, who was clearly marked as a journalist, pulled him and then pushed him against the wall”.99

[ July ] 13 July – A murder took place in the grounds of the city swimming pool in Zaječar. Several TV crews came to the scene of crime. Friends of the murdered youth attacked the police and journalists, trying to prevent the former from conducting a crime scene investigation and the latter from filming the scene of the crime. Police reinforcements managed to protect the journalists and help them leave the swimming pool area safely. How- ever, the attackers later waited for the journalists in front of the media offices from which reporters of the national television broadcasters B92, Pink and Avala operated, stopped them and demanded the tapes with re- corded material. The attackers threatened the journalists with death if they published what had happened.100 The police reacted quickly, identifying the attackers and bringing criminal charges within ten or so days against

98 Brega Is Closely Guarded Like Tito, Press, 18 June 2008, p. 25, author: Sanja Vajagić.

99 Scuffle at church, Kurir, 19 June 2008, p. 7, author: B. Kuljanin.

100 Journalists under Attack in Zaječar, B92, 14 July 2008.  38 | 39

Igor Prvulović, Miljan Manić and Ivan Lazarević for violent behaviour and interference with public officials in the performance of their duties.101

16 July – Novi Pazar Regionalna televizija journalist Medin Halilović was physically assaulted by a man in Stevan Nemanja street, suffering concus- sion. Halilović said the following about the incident: “While I was going home from work, he came up to me and asked what was it that had made him known to the police. He told me he’d kill me, and then hit me twice with his fist on the head. It was only later that passers-by told me the at- tacker’s name, so I remembered that I had reported several times on inci- dents in which he had been involved”. Shortly after the incident, the police arrested Aladin D who was identified as the attacker.102

19 July – Former policeman Marko Petrović first threatened, and then beat up Stefan Cvetković, RTV TNT’s editor-in-chief from Bela Crkva. The inci- dent took place in a restaurant in Bela Crkva where Cvetković was dining with his girlfriend when Pavlović approached him and struck him with a fist on the head. The reason for the attack was footage that RTV TNT and subsequently B92 had broadcast, in which Pavlović, the then police officer, could be seen using narcotics. After this footage was broadcast, Pavlović was suspended as a police officer. The Independent Association of Jour- nalists of Serbia, (NUNS) and the Independent Journalist Association of Vojvodina (NDNV) condemned the attack on Cvetković and stated that journalists were under serious threat locally: “We are concerned and won- dering what will happen next if law enforcement agencies fail to prosecute the perpetrators in a timely fashion. Journalists in local communities are under threat to a larger extent than journalists in Belgrade or Novi Sad. Far removed from the eyes of the public, local strongmen feel sufficiently protected to dare try control the editorial policies of local broadcasters, and anyone who opposes this becomes a target for attack.”103

101 Criminal Charges for Attack on Journalists, Dnevnik, 24 July 2008, p. 9.

102 Arrest for Attack on Journalist, B92, 17 July 2008, http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Hapsenje-zbog-napada-na-novinara.html .

103 Editor Got Fist on the Head over Footage, Blic, 20 July 2008, p. 10. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

23 July – In Freedom square in Novi Sad, where a rally of support for Ra- dovan Karadžić was taking place, an unknown person attacked a TV Apo- lo cameraman and hit him on the head. For security reasons, the assaulted journalist wished to remain anonymous, so Dragana Aleksić, a journalist who had witnessed the incident, gave the following statement: “At around 8pm, my colleague and I went to Freedom square where about 50 young people had gathered. My intention was to approach them and ask if there was an organiser of the event so that I could take a statement. When we came up to them, most of them, I’d say, were high on drugs or drunk, and they all said they were organisers, that I had nothing to do there and to go away, which I did because I saw the situation was tense and that something might happen. However, my colleague continued to film. They told him to stop, and lower the camera, but instead he moved closer, to the midst of it all, near the Svetozar Miletić monument, where a Serbian flag had been hoisted. Two young men were taking pictures of each other. One wore a cap with a cockade. They told the cameraman to stop filming, saying he was from a traitorous television station. The cameraman lowered his camera and tried to calm the situation. One of them came up to me, while three or four charged towards us, shouting that we shouldn’t film anything. Then someone from the crowd approached my colleague from the back and slapped him heavily on the ear. It was horrible, really.”104

23 July – FONET cameraman Zoran Jovanović was hit with a beer bottle on the head in Dečanska street in Belgrade during demonstrations held in protest against the arrest of Karadžić. A witness to this incident, a Dutch peace activist, Sjers Benker, said Jovanović was hit from the back by a young man with a mask on his face. 105

24 July – During the demonstrations against the arrest of Karadžić, a B92 journalist, Boško Branković, was attacked by hooligans who inflicted a se- rious leg injury. Branković was filming a column of demonstrators passing by the Turkish embassy and at one point he noticed a young man who was yelling. Branković turned the camera towards him, but he attacked the journalist and knocked him to the ground with a leg kick. All the while the

104 Hooligans Beating Journalists Again, Dnevnik, 24 July 2008, p. 29, author: I. Mihaljević.

105 Journalists under Attack and SPS Flag Burnt, Danas, 24 July 2008, p. 1, author: I. Živanović.  40 | 41

crowd chanted: “Hit, hit the journalist”. Then, other demonstrators joined in to kick the cameraman while he was lying on the ground. The police subsequently identified and detained four attackers of Boško Branković. Court proceedings are underway. 106

24 July – During an action against violent demonstrators, the police also at- tacked a group of journalists standing nearby with their press IDs in their hands. One of the journalists who was beaten up that night was Miloš Đorelijevski, a BETA news agency journalist. In Terazije, in Belgrade city centre, Đorelijevski came across a several-dozen-strong police cordon. He presented his press ID and said that he was heading towards the Emer- gency Clinical Centre. The policemen then started screaming at him: “You cunt, you’re attacking us from the back”. One of the policemen came up to him, kicked him and tried to slam the baton into his groin. The journalist asked them why they were doing this when he had not done anything, but the policemen continued to beat him.107

24 July – Unknown assailants beat up Spanish journalists Oscar Martinez Forcado and Luis Perez while they were reporting on the Serbian Radical Party rally against the arrest of Karadžić. Perez gave the following state- ment about the incident: “We were reporting on the Serbian Radical Party rally against the arrest of Radovan Karadžić. While Mr Nikolić was speak- ing, clashes between police and a group of demonstrators broke out. We went there to film the clashes, but when we were about 20 metres from the stage, all of a sudden two persons attacked us. One of the attackers hit my colleague, the cameraman, from the back, and three seconds later another assailant kicked the camera. The camera was instantly destroyed, and my colleague was sent to the Emergency Clinical Centre. He received a heavy blow to his back. He felt pain, but we don’t know if something’s broken”.108

24 July – During the demonstrations in Belgrade, a FONET journalist, who prefers to remain anonymous, was attacked. While he was taking pictures,

106 Hit, Hit a Journalist, B92, 25 July 2008.

107 Interview with Miloš Đorelijevski dated 24 July 2008. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

108 Chronology of riots in Belgrade, B92, 30 July 2008, (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=07&dd=30&nav_id=310854 Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

an unknown person attacked him, hit him several times on his back, and smashed his camera.109

28 July – During the demonstrations in protest against the arrest of Karadžić, hooligans attacked American photographer/reporter Russell Gordon while he was taking pictures of the rally. At one point an unknown per- son approached him from the back and physically assaulted him, trying to snatch his camera. The attacker threatened him, saying he should leave immediately because he was “provoking people”.110

29 July – Following the clashes between hooligans and the police during the demonstrations organised in Belgrade by the Serbian Radical Party, when a Gazeta daily journalist approached the party’s secretary general, Ale- ksandar Vučić to ask him questions, Radical Party supporters attacked her. Vučić started shouting at the journalist, while the Radicals nearby insulted her. One of them came up to her and struck her.111

[ August ] 8 August – A security guard from the Gradsko zelenilo public utility in Novi Sad tried to prevent a Dnevnik daily journalist from taking photos of emer- gency service doctors resuscitating a woman on the Štrand city beach. The journalist was first prevented from coming near to where it was all hap- pening, and then the attacker came after her, trying to seize her camera. He told her that she would not be allowed to leave the beach with the camera and pictures that she had taken. He then called the police who came and asked her to show her ID. She did not want to get further embroiled in the argument. However, she managed to take the card with photos out of the grounds of Štrand city beach. The following day already, a Novi Sad Grad- sko zelenilo spokesman apologised publicly to Dnevnik but said that the public utility could not be held responsible for each and every individual case of inappropriate behaviour on the part of their employees.112

109 Ibid.

110 Pro-Serb Yankee under Attack, Kurir, 29 July 2008, p. 4, author: A. Obradović.

111 Gazeta Journalist under Attack, Gazeta, 30 July 2008, p. 3.

112 You Won’t Leave the Beach with Those Pictures, Dnevnik , 9 August 2008, p. 35, author: I. Brcan.  42 | 43

12 August – Ljubomir V stormed into the Kraljevačke novosti weekly news- room and threatened all the present journalists with his pistol. He hit one of the journalists with the pistol butt and inflicted a light physical injury – skin cuts on the hand. The company’s management brought criminal charges against Ljubomir V for having threatened public safety, inflicting light physical injuries and for illegal possession of a weapon. They also brought civil lawsuit for insults, abuse and harassment.113 Kraljevo mu- nicipal magistrate sentenced the said Ljubomir V to 25 days in prison for having insulted and abused Kraljevačke novosti journalists.114

30 August – Representatives of the 1389 movement and Obraz organisation, demonstrating against the arrest of Karadžić, stormed into the offices of BETA news agency to protest against the agency’s failure, in their view, to report on their rallies. Demonstrators were carrying a placard which read “Yellow journalism – BETA news agency” and a flashlight that was sym- bolically supposed to bring “light to the media blackout in Serbia”.115 Also, BETA agency journalists said that on one occasion, during one of several raids on their offices, unknown persons took pictures and filmed journal- ists from the agency who were present in the newsroom.116

[ October ] 17 October – A bomb was discovered around 8.45am in Kurir’s daily news- room in Vlajkovićeva street in Belgrade. The bomb was found by a cleaning lady in one of the jardinières on the second floor, where top management offices were located. Police came to the scene and removed the bomb. The persons who planted the explosive device have not yet been identified.117

113 Pistol Threat to Journalists, Dnevnik, 13 August 2008, p. 8.

114 Twenty-Five Days in Prison for Insulting Journalist, 24 časa, 13 August 2008, p. 5.

115 Karadžić Supporters Stormed into BETA Agency, Press, 31 August 2008, p. 9.

116 Excerpt from BETA journalist’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

117 Bomb Found on Kurir Premises, B92, 17 October 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index. php?yyyy=2008&mm=10&dd=17&nav_id=324016 . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

22 October – Geopolitika’s editor-in-chief, Slobodan Erić, established during a regular servicing of his Ford Escort car that an unknown person had loosened a central screw in his left front wheel, which might have caused the wheel to fall off while driving. This could have resulted in a traffic accident and serious injuries. Erić claimed that his car mechanic, while checking the car, found marks left by a wrench on that wheel only. No similar marks were detected on other wheels. He went on to say that the perpetrator put the wheel cover back to hide the marks. Erić’s guess was that a possible motive for the threat to his safety, as he had no personal enemies, was the editorial concept of Geopolitika. This, he said, was based on articulation and defence of Serbian national and state interests.118

[ November ] 2 November – Sulejman A from the village of Veliki Trnovac attacked Nedžad Behljuji, owner of Spektra TV from Bujanovac, in a parking lot in front of the entrance to the television and inflicted serious bodily injuries, in- cluding concussion. Behljuji turned for medical assistance to Bujanovac Health Care Centre and then to a similar medical institution in Vranje. In a statement given to OSCE representatives, Behljuji said that he had lately been a frequent target of attacks and threats. He went on to say that he had lost confidence in the police and now planned to take care of his own security. “I’m in a big trouble, and I’m forced to defend myself, my family and TV Spektra journalists who are carrying out their difficult as- signments professionally”, Behljuji said.119 NUNS condemned the attack on Behljuji and called on the police and other competent organs to protect both him and his family as well as to provide normal conditions for his life and work.120

22 November – According to statements by Slavko Savić and Čedomir Savić, RTV Kuršumlija editor and director, respectively, Kuršumlija deputy mayor Dejan Milošević and deputy chairman of Kuršumlija municipal as-

118 Geopolitika Editor’s Car Sabotaged, Politika, 23 October 2008, p. A9, author: M.S.P.

119 OSCE report.

120 NUNS Condemns Attacks on Bujanovac TV Spektra Owner, NUNS press release, http://www.nuns.org.yu/aktivnosti/view.jsp?articleId=9941.  44 | 45

sembly Branislav Jovanović, accompanied by another five unknown per- sons, stormed into this media company and threatened staff with death if they again mentioned the names of these municipal officials. On the day before they stormed into the TV station’s offices, news about alleged financial abuse involving funds earmarked by the state for army reservists on account of their participation in the armed conflict in Kosovo in 1999 had been broadcast by RTV Kuršumlija. Dejan Milošević claimed that the conflict between the municipality and the local television stemmed from the refusal of the local authorities to pay the sum of 360,000 dinars to RTV Kuršumlija. He added that he went to the local television offices, to- gether with a group of reservists, because he was displeased with untruths published about them but insisted no threats were made. The next day, Kuršumlija police department launched an investigation into this inci- dent. 121

26 November – In Novi Sad city centre, in Ilija Ognjanović street, at about 3am, unidentified persons set fire to the Porsche owned by Novi Sad televi- sion Panonija owner Zoran Andrić. While Novi Sad police confirmed that the incident took place, Andrić was reluctant to comment, however.122

[ December ] 7 December – Unknown persons broke into the premises of the Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina, NDNV. In its press release, NDNV stated that nothing was stolen from its offices, although the burglars got past the first door, because another safe door presented an obstacle that they could not overcome. It was the third attempt this year to break into the premises of this journalists’ association. According to the NDNV man- agement, none of those responsible for any of the three attempted robber- ies had been identified or apprehended.123

121 See video clip with statements of participants in the incident on the following web page: http://www.mefeedia.com/entry/upad-u-rtv-kur-umlija/12369946/ .

122TV Panonija Owner’s Car Burnt, B92, 27 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=11&dd=27&nav_id=330971 .

123 NDNV Premises Broken Into, NDNV, 8 December 2008, see the web page: http://www.ndnv.org/vest.php?id=5526 . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

B. THREATS, VERBAL ASSAULTS, PRESSURES AND VARIOUS OTHER ACTIONS PREVENTING JOURNALISTS FROM CARRYING OUT THEIR DUTIES

[ January ] 08 January – Director of RTV Spektra Jeton Ismaili and editor-in-chief Baki Rexhepi claim that the mayor of Bujanovac, Nagip Arifi, threatened them after Ismaili published a text on the web pages of www.presheva.com in which he criticised the local authorities for stopping the privatisation of RTV Bujanovac. According to them, Arifi called them by phone and threat- ened to destroy their television station and their lives. Arifi described the allegations as untrue.124

17 January – Zvonimir Perušić, director of the Hrvatska riječ newspaper publishing house, resigned from his position, saying he could no longer resist political pressures. He said that the Croatian National Council, the founder of this media organisation, had illegally appointed a new board of directors, acting under the political pressure of a political party. Perušić added that the whole case could be seen as an attempt by politicians to curb and control journalist circles. The Croatian National Council and Democratic Alliance of Croats dismissed the allegations.125

23 January – Senada Leković, journalist from Novi Pazar’s radio Universa, was assaulted at around 1pm while passing the Vrbak hotel, where the Pa- zar Movement for Changes was holding a protest. Leković gave the follow- ing statement: “I went to cover the protest of workers and NGO activists in the town centre. Passing by the hotel, I was seen by people from municipal protocol, namely, when a ceremonial session of the town assembly was be-

124 See OSCE report from the investigation dated 15 January 2008. Filed in the OSCE documentation.

125 http://www.subotica.info/press.php?tag_id=1368&press_id=536 .  46 | 47

ing held in the hotel. These people from protocol started shouting insults and threatening me. I am a modest woman, dedicated to my religion, job and child. I cannot repeat in public the kind of ugly words they used, and there were threats as well. I passed by, remaining silent, and later reported the case to the police. Everyone who knows me know I did not deserve such unpleasantness.”126 The Meshihat of the Islamic Community in Ser- bia, headed by mufti Muamer Zukorlić, announced that Leković had been assaulted by senior officials of the Ticket for Sandžak coalition and offi- cials of the Novi Pazar municipality. The Information Service of the Novi Pazar municipality denied involvement in the assault on the journalist. 127

[ February ] 10 February – A photographer of the local weekly Subotičke was denied his professional right to report from the Veliko Prelo gathering, organised by the Croatian Cultural Centre from Subotica. Jovanov tried to enter Sub- otica Sports Hall, where the Veliko Prelo was held on February 2, using a legitimate journalist’s identification, but was told that only accredited journalists could enter, although his paper did not receive the accredita- tion questionnaire. When attempting to use another entrance and clear things up with organisers, Jovanov was thrown out by security, who ex- plained that they had such orders.128

17 February – According to a statement from a journalist from Radio BETA RFI, Jovana Đurović, during the protests against Kosovo’s independence declaration in Belgrade, a group of football fans threatened her with the words: “You will be beaten because you are a traitor.”129

19 February – A photographer from the Alo daily, who prefers to remain anonymous, gave a statement to OSCE representatives saying he was

126 Attack on Journalist, Alo, 25. January 2008, page 3, author E.H.

127 Threats to Journalist Senada Leković, Politika, 25 January 2008, page A10.

128 Croatian Cultural Centre Denies Shooting in Statement to Subotičke, Pravda, 11 February 2008, page 8

129 Excerpt from the written statement of Jovana Đurović. The report in filed the OSCE documentation. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

threatened at the administrative border between Kosovo and Serbia prop- er, at the Jarinje border crossing, while doing his job, photographing a pro- test by locals that turned into an action against the border facilities. The journalist said: “The situation was specific because protestors were aware that the attacks on border facilities were not legal but they were intent on carrying them out. In similar situations protestors do not want their ac- tions to be documented and show up the next day in papers, because it can be a basis for legal action against them. When I started shooting, several people came up to me and said, ‘Don’t fool around taking our pictures, hairy guy, ‘cause we will bust your chops.’ Since I learned from my previous experience how serious these threats are, I did not take any pictures”.130

21 February – A group of protestors gathered around 8pm in the vicinity of the RTV B92 building in New Belgrade. Some time later, a dozen of them charged the building with rocks in their hands, but the police stopped them. The director of RTV B92, Veran Matić, said that several days before, the media group received a lot of threats, which included open talk of setting fire to the building that B92 leases from Serbian state. Igor Božić, editor of B92 info television station, told OSCE representatives about the incident: “It is a very selective attack because the hooligans were surround- ing the building that was broadcasting a television programme. It is obvi- ous that the target of the attack was the building with journalists in it. It is also obvious that the attack was politically controlled and that someone organised hooligan groups whose task was to show that B92 was a trai- torous television station.”131 Božić added that the attackers were football fans and that later that day it turned out that the then minister of capital investments, Velimir Ilić, had announced those attacks at a government session.132 In the end, he added that the consequences of the attack could be felt in the tense atmosphere in staff offices.133

130 Written statement by journalist of ‘Alo’ daily. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

131 Written statement by Igor Božić. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

132 Ibid.

133 Ibid.  48 | 49

26 February – At this time, the mayor of Zaječar and several associates were on trial, charged with skimming the municipal budget. Judge Zoran Jovanović removed the journalists of Nova timočka revija from the court- room although the journalists repeatedly showed their identification pa- pers. The same happened to colleagues from other media. One of the basic principles in contemporary legal systems is public access to trials.134

27 February – Danica Vučenić, journalist of RTV B92 and host of radio show “Kažiprst”, (Index Finger), was subjected to threats while sitting with a friend in the Ruski Car restaurant in downtown Belgrade. Vučenić gave the following statement to the OSCE: “As soon as we sat down in the res- taurant, I noticed a man of specific features – crew cut, strong, in a T- shirt although it was cold, and he was staring at me. We sat at the table several metres from his table. He was sitting alone. He was on the phone and stared at me the whole time. He was staring so obviously that even my friend, who is not from the media, noticed it. After more than 20 minutes, he stood up and went right towards us. He came to the table, stopped for half a second, and turned at an angle of 90 degrees and then went on to- wards the exit. He made several steps, turned and looked at me without saying anything. He resumed going towards exit. At the back of his shirt there was a sign and inscription of the Special Operations Unit. This event was a classical example of intimidation.”135

28 February – A journalist from Novi Sad’s Most television accused a sen- ior local official from the League of Social Democrats, Zoran Petakov, of threatening her, by saying that if a new revolution ever occurred, her tel- evision would be sixth on a list of buildings to be set on fire, and that he was carrying a gun that he was ready to use. Afterwards, the Information Service of the League of Social Democrats apologized to the television sta- tion, saying Petakov would suffer consequences for this incident.136

134 Interview with Miloš Zdravković, publisher of Nova timočka revija dated 28 February, 2008. Filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

135 Written statement by Danica Vučenić. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

136 http://www.rtv.co.yu/sr/vesti/vojvodina/vojvodina/2008_02_27/vest_52894.jsp. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

[ March ] 01 March – Several members of the Sabor Srpskih Dveri (Assembly of Serbian Gateways) organization tried to prevent the promotion of the radio show Peščanik (Hourglass) in Pančevo. After the speech from Srđa Popović, a dozen young men started protesting loudly and tried to stop the speech by force but were prevented from doing so by police, the audience and guest speakers. Svetlana Lukić, a journalist and the host of Peščanik said: “We learned from one of the policemen that a group of young men was stopped at the Pančevo bridge. The police did not let them enter Pančevo. However, several young men entered the building anyway and, after ten minutes, tried to interrupt the promotion by loudly protesting against what they heard at Peščanik’s promotion.” Radiša Stanišić, director of Dom omladine in Pančevo, where the promotion was held, said that dur- ing the promotion they had received an anonymous tip that there was a bomb in the room.137

02 March – At the annual assembly of the Serbian Radical Party’s local branch in Sremska Mitrovica, a senior official for Srem, Vitomir Plužarević, threat- ened the local media. Plužarević said he spotted the enemies of the party, which were the media, more specifically Sremska televizija, M novine and Rumske novine. He added that he held it against them that they “do not air Radical ideas in their programme and haven’t written a single posi- tive article about the Radicals”. Plužarević suggested to his colleagues that “when they come to power, they would speak differently with the said media houses”, and he promised he would “fight those systems that are against the Serbian Radicals and eliminate them with quality technology and methods”. The editor-in-chief of M novine, Svetlana Cucanić, said of the incident that Plužarević was a public figure and a deputy, which is why his words had special significance: “The irresponsible use of strong language can have unforeseen consequences. No one knows where those words would strike, in what way and how strongly”. Vladimir Ćosić, editor- in-chief of Rumske novine, called the vocabulary of Plužarević Goebbels- like and added: “What would happen if someone felt the need to use those words as an incentive and alibi for real violence. Some younger colleagues

137Pančevo Residents Defended Peščanik, B92, 2 March 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=03&dd=02&nav_id=287261 .  50 | 51

are really afraid that the Radicals could start shutting down media, that they can be left without jobs, or worse”.138

07 March – At 7.10pm., the staff of the daily Gazeta received an anonymous tip that a bomb had been planted in the building housing its offices. Soon afterwards, special police force arrived at the scene and after conducting a detailed search of all rooms, concluded it was a false alarm. The sec- retary of Gazeta said that the call was muted and a male voice had said in a threatening tone: “A ticking bomb has been planted in the building” and immediately hung up. Antonije Kovačević, editor-in-chief of Gazeta, said that the call was just the latest in a series of pressures on the media. “Someone is using the chaos in the country to create the atmosphere of fear. I expect the state to find the perpetrators and protect the freedom of public speech and information and thus enable journalists to do their jobs without fear for their lives.” 139

15 March – Momčilo Đorđević, journalist on the Nedeljni telegraf, a weekly, from Belgrade, received a letter threatening him with execution over arti- cles he published. The letter described Nedeljni telegraf as an anti-Serbian paper and said its goal was to sell the country to the Americans, NATO and the EU. In a statement given to the OSCE, Đorđević emphasised that he was very frightened and that his work had been made difficult by all this. He added that while the threats were reported to the police, the at- tackers had not been identified.140

23 March – The staff of Nedeljni telegraf received a letter containing threats to the owner, Momčilo Torgović, and journalist Danijela Milinković. The letter said: “You are in for big trouble! Watch out for the bullet you will get in the head! Be prepared to go to the great beyond. You will be blown up. Watch out when getting into your car because you could be blown into a thousand pieces.” According to Torgović, the letter was signed “The Red

138 Accusations and Threats to Media, Vreme, 24 April 2008, p. 4, author Jovan Milević.

139 With a Bomb on Truth, Gazeta, 8 March 2007, p. 9.

140 Written statement by Momčilo Đorđević. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

Berets”. Nedeljni telegraf informed the police about these threats.141 The threats to Nedeljni telegraf were condemned by the Brussels-based Inter- national Association of Journalists.142

24 March – According to the daily Kurir, after several articles were published about the then minister of economy and regional development, Mlađan Dinkić, their journalist, Vuk Stanković, received a call from Nikola Papak, spokesman for the G17 Plus party, headed by Dinkić, who threatened to sue him for several thousand euros. 143

30 March – Persons unknown called weekly Pirotske novine from Pirot and announced that four bombs would explode in the near future. Accord- ing to employees, an unidentified male introduced himself as commander of the Bulgarian Liberation Army for the Pirot region and said that the bombs would explode at 11am sharp. Strong police forces immediately arrived on the scene and established it was a false alarm and that no ex- plosive devices were in the buildings.144

[ April ] 11 April –In Novi Sad, Dinko Gruhonjić, president of the Independent As- sociation of Vojvodina Journalists and head of BETA news agency’s office in Novi Sad, was arrested. That day, Gruhonjić had gone to a gathering of the Otpor movement to take a statement and write an article. While interviewing the organisers of the event, they were approached by the police and asked for identification papers and a license for the gather- ing. Gruhonjić stepped aside for a few metres because as a journalist he wanted to obtain a complete picture of their conversation. After the police asked for his identification, which he declined to submit, saying there was

141 Threats to Owner and Journalist of Nedeljni telegraf, Blic, 24 March 2008, http://www.blic.co.yu/hronika.php?id=35253

142 Ibid.

143 Dinkić’s Errand Boy Threatens Kurir, 25 March 2008, p. 6, http://www.kurir-info.rs/clanak/kurir-25-03-2008/dinkicev-potrcko-preti .

144False Tips in Pirot and Subotica, B92, 31 March 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=03&dd=31&nav_id=291687 .  52 | 53

no reason to do so, as he was only doing his job before the police inter- rupted it, and was not an organiserr of the gathering, Gruhonjić was taken to the police station. In 2007, Gruhonjić and his family received serious threats on the neo-Nazi web site Stormfront.145

[ May ] 05 May – A senior official of the Serbian Radical Party and then mayor of Ze- mun, Gordana Pop Lazić, said the party would fight against all media that support pro-European forces. In the television programme “Uvećanje” (Blow Up) aired on B92 info television, Pop Lazić said: “We must prima- rily work on enlightening younger generations and on grooming them in a patriotic and national spirit. Unfortunately, we must fight the media that support these European Union forces because that is not good, and also non-government organisations who are doing the same”.146 Dragan Janjić, assistant minister of culture in charge of media, commented on the state- ment: “There is a difference between the rights of politicians and citizens to protest against badly presented facts, but no politician has the right to announce he will crush those media that espouse an editorial policy he or she does not like.” 147

09 May – Several journalists and correspondents from the daily Kurir re- ceived SMS warning them “to watch out after May 11” and saying that “journalists of Kurir should be shot because they are conducting an anti- Serb policy”, as well as insulting messages such as “You people from Kurir are anti-Serb mafia shits.”148

145 Interview with Nedim Sejdinović and Dinko Gruhonjić on this incident dated 11 April 2008. The report is filed in the documentation of the Initiative.

146 Serbian Radical Party: Enlightening the Youth, B92, 06 May 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=05&dd=06&nav_id=297171 .

147 Janjić: Politicians Must Be Held Accountable for What They Say, Blic, 06 May 2008, http://www.blic.co.yu/politika.php?id=40618 .

148 Threats to Kurir Correspondents, May 10 2008, http://www.kurir-info.rs/clanak/kurir-10-05-2008/prete-i-dopisnicima-kurira . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

09 May – Kurir announced that one of their journalists, Oliver Nikolić, was ar- rested while doing his work in the Commercial Bank in Svetogorska street in Belgrade. BETA news agency reported that when Nikolić was assigned with checking certain documentation related to Commercial Bank’s busi- ness dealings, security called the police who arrested him on the spot. 149

15 May – Miodrag Bakić, secretary of the local branch of the Socialist Party of Serbia and mayor of Apatin, verbally assaulted Sofija Paulić Škero, vet- eran journalist of Radio Apatin and the local paper Glas komune. Bakić accused the journalist of biased reports on the election campaign, because the candidate of the group of citizens Movement for Apatin was allegedly given more time in the news programme than all other contestants com- bined. He accused the journalist of tolerating the street talk of his political opponent because she herself was on the ticket of the group of citizens. About the incident Sofija Paulić Škero said: “It is a blatant lie that I am on the ticket of the Movement for Apatin and that I was collecting signatures for it. On behalf of the local leadership of his party, Bakić launched a ha- rangue against me, which has happened in the past as well. The fear he is trying to spread, the lies he is saying, and the attacks on integrity of my person and the journalistic profession are all things concerning which I will address the International Federation of Journalists.”150

15 May – The owner and editor of Valjevo weekly Pečat, Željka Milićević, in an editorial comment published in the latest issue of her paper, threatened the editor of the Valjevo monthly and BETA news agency correspond- ent Branko Vićentijević by promising him a “free obituary in 8,000 cop- ies”, while commenting on his health condition. A number of the media from Valjevo issued a press release condemning the behaviour of edi- tor of Pečat.151 In September, the municipal court in Valjevo fined Željka Milićević 600,000 dinars, after she had failed to respond within the legal

149 Journalist of Kurir Arrested, Glas javnosti, 10 May 2008, http://www.naslovi.net/2008-05-10/glas-javnosti/uhapsen-novinar-kurira/667646 .

150 Media Hunt Full of Lies, Danas, 16 May 2008, (http://www.danas.rs/vesti/drustvo/terazije/hajka_uz_gomilu_lazi.14.html?news_id=91339)

151 Free Obituary to Colleague Announced, Blic, 16 May 2008 http://www.blic.co.yu/srbija.php?id=40993 .  54 | 55

deadline to the suit filed by Vićentijević for compensation for emotional pain. 152

17 May – According to a statement of a journalist on the paper Bečejski mo- zaik, the director of the Agricultural Industrial Complex, Bečej Dragan Satarić, as well as union representatives and workers of PIK Bečej, verbally assaulted the journalist of this media house while she was reporting on the leasing of state-owned land. The journalist, who wants to remain anony- mous, claims she was told: “We know who you work for”, “It will end up badly if you keep reporting on this”, and such like. The journalist added that this was not the first verbal assault of this kind and similar things had happened on several occasions in the spring and summer of 2008.153

20 May – Several journalists and photographers who had gathered in the Sonja Marinković primary school in order to cover disciplinary proce- dures against eight pupils who had abused another pupil and filmed it all and posted it on YouTube, were thrown out on the street. After they had introduced themselves as journalists to the director and waited in front of the room where the disciplinary procedure was held, the mother of one of the pupils started insulting them, which resulted in journalists being thrown out of the building. The pupils were also insulting the journalists throughout, some of them proposing “to gather, wait for them, beat up the journalists and set them on fire”.154

21 May– According to daily Kurir, Srđan Đoković, father of the famous ten- nis player Novak Đoković, stormed into the booth of RTS where report- er Nebojša Višković was commenting on the semi-final match between Đoković and Spanish player Rafael Nadal. According to Kurir, feeling dis- satisfied with Višković’s commentary on the match, Srđan Đoković told him: “What kind of comments are that? Why are you only praising Nadal? Novak is a Serb, aren’t we all patriots?”. Kurir also reported that Višković

152 Editor of Pečat Punished, Blic, 04 October 2008, p. 2, author P.V.

153 Written statement by journalist of Bečejski mozaik. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

154 We’ll Beat up Journalist and Set Him on Fire, Građanski list, 19 May 2008, http://www.gradjanski.rs/navigacija.php?vest=22535&naslovna=1 . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

was called after the match by Goran Đoković, Novak’s uncle, and told “to watch out because anything could happen to him”.155

23 May –A text entitled “Savo the Monkey vs Aleksandar Vučić” was published in one of the issues of the Belgrade daily Pravda, reporting on one of the rallies in front of the Belgrade City Assembly and saying negative things about Savo Milosevic, footballer and former player of the Serbian national selection. Afterwards, according to a journalist from Pravda, Milošević called the paper and threatened them thus: “I will bring my people and I will settle my scores with you and destroy your paper.”156

25 May – At 11.40am, persons unknown called Kikinda’s VK radio and said a bomb had been planted in the radio’s offices. The tip happened while the television station was broadcasting a documentary containing speeches of Serbia’s late prime minister, Zoran Đinđić. Employees were immediately evacuated from the building, while police searched the premises and es- tablished that the call was false. Borjana Bosančić, audio and video organ- iserr of VK, said: “A middle-aged male voice asked if this was VK. When I said it was, he said that a bomb had been planted and hung up. At that moment I was alone in the office, so I immediately called Zoran Milešević and then warned the colleagues from the television and called the police. In the meantime, two colleagues came to the office, but the police told us to leave the building.”157

26 May – A cameraman of VK television, Zoran Tornjanski, was banned from entering the local assembly in Kikinda when he wanted to report on the scheduled signing of the coalition agreement between the Serbian Radi- cal party, the Democratic Party of Serbia and the Socialist Party of Serbia. Tornjanski was soon joined by another journalist of this media house, De- jan Stepanov. When they asked “Why can’t VK television report from this event?”, the guard standing at the entrance told them “he was only doing his job”. The letter that this media house sent to local and international

155 Srđan Scolds Viško, Kurir, 22 May 2008, http://www.kurir-info.rs/clanak/kurir-22-05-2008/srdan-izribao-viska .

156 Savo Milošević Called Monkey Threatens Journalists, Pravda, 24 May 2008.

157 False Bomb Alarm at Local Television, Blic, 26 May 2008, http://www.blic.co.yu/vojvodina.php?id=43107 .  56 | 57

institutions for the protection of human rights and the journalistic pro- fession said: “This is the second such case within 48 hours, because our reporter was not allowed to enter the building on Sunday as well, when we wanted to learn the data about a voter turn-out from the president of the municipal election committee. Our media was not even invited to today’s event, although other media houses and reporters were.”158

[ Jun ] 03 June – An unknown person called the daily Glas javnosti in Vlajkovićeva street in Belgrade at around 10.30am and said a bomb had been plant- ed in the building and that the message should be relayed to any people concerned. All employees immediately left the offices. The special police searched afterwards with dogs but found nothing.159

04 June – The commission of the municipal council in Svilajnac issued an order to stop the broadcast of TV Resava and then changed the locks on the offices that this television was sharing with the oldest local paper in Serbia, Resavski poštonoša.160

10 June – Threats to a journalist from the daily Dnevnik from Novi Sad, Željko Balaban, appeared on the site of the neo-Nazi organisation, Stormfront. As a journalist, Balaban has been dealing with the human rights of the les- bian, gay and transgender community for a long time. One of the forum members on this site said: “Journalists are now calling fascists everyone who is against sexual deviants and it’s treated as a normal thing here. This doesn’t make any sense and I wonder whether the gentleman in question is gay himself. Well, Mr Balaban, if you are gay, then you know where to go; if you are not, call me to talk because I am very interested to learn how you can write like that. Someone must be paying you because every nor- mal person runs like hell from faggots. To everyone who wants to break

158 Kikinda Coalition Only for Selected Media, Blic, 28 May 2008, http://www.blic.co.yu/vojvodina.php?id=43392 .

159 False Alarm in Glas offices, B92, 04 June 2008, http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Lazna-dojava-u-redakciji-Glasa.html .

160 Journalists’ Association of Serbia report. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

up any faggot gathering I recommend old eggs and tomato as methods of persuasion.”161

13 June – Nebojša Ivanov, director of the weekly Bratstvo, according to the editorship of this media house, introduced censorship after ordering the acting editor-in-chief, Momir Todorov, not to allow the publication of an article entitled “Financial gathering of National Council”, by the editor, Ki- ril Georgiev. In 2007, the National Council of Bulgarians took over from the government the founding rights to Bratstvo, which had existed for 49 years. The NUNS issued a statement saying that “they would aid journal- ists and editors of Bratstvo every way they could in the fight against the autocracy of their director who, as a lawyer, should know that censorship in Serbia is banned by law and that the editorial policy of the paper does not come under his jurisdiction.” 162

15 June – Novi Sad police received a phone call that a bomb had been planted in the offices of RTV Panonija, which would explode at 8.30pm. Police im- mediately informed the media house about it. After a special police unit arrived at the scene and searched the premises, it was established that the tip had been false. 163

15 June – Around 11pm, Radio Television Serbia, which in Serbia has the status of a public service, received a telephone call from an unknown male who told them that “a bomb has been planted in your offices”. At the time, there were 36 employees in the building. A special police unit arrived on the scene and after a detailed search found that it was a false tip.164

17 June – Luka Mičeta, director of the news agency TANJUG, tended his un- conditional resignation, citing “great pressure on this agency by the state”, which had culminated when police had attempted to throw the employees from the offices of TANJUG press centre onto the street in Knez Mihajlo-

161 Speaking out from Rat Tunnels, Dnevnik, 11 June 2008, p. 6, author: N. Jakovljev.

162 Independent Association of Serbian Journalists: Censorship Condemned in Bratstvo, BETA, 13 June 2008.

163 Tip on Bomb in RTV Panonija, Danas, 16 June 2008, p. 25.

164 False Bomb Alarm at RTS, Večernje novosti, 16 June 2008, p. 15.  58 | 59

va. Mičeta claims that TANJUG had had those offices for 30 years and that Nino Brajović, president of the Association of Serbian and Montenegrin Journalists, wanted to usurp them.165 On the other hand, Brajović said that TANJUG had not paid any rent to this association for years, though the of- fices had been leased to them for a symbolic price of 1.3 euros per square metre, at the same time as they were leasing their office in Obilićev venac for a commercial price. He said that according to the current situation, the Association of Serbian and Montenegrin Journalists was financing the work of TANJUG, which was inadmissible.166 A Commercial Court in Bel- grade fined TANJUG and general manager Luka Mičeta in July 550,000 dinars for preventing court executors from moving them out of their of- fices. 167

19 June – While shooting a piece on a plot of land over which Petar Petrović had launched an ownership suit in Novi Pazar, two persons threatened journalist Ivana Milić and cameraman of TV Jedinstvo Edis Klimenta. Milić said about the incident: “We were filming the land owned by Petar Petrović which someone else had used to build a house there. When we arrived at the downtown with Petrović, we were approached by two men who told us they were going to slit our throats if we broadcast our foot- age. Petrović had received the land in 2000 but his property was usurped. The Supreme Court confirmed his ownership, but he could not protect his property. I wanted to investigate the case as a journalist, but received serious threats.” On the same afternoon, Novi Pazar police identified and apprehended two persons who threatened the journalist crew.168

[ July ] 04 July – After public airing of the incident which occurred on 17 June in the church of the Holy Trinity in Dušanovci, when a priest attacked a jour- nalist of Dečja televizija who was recording the incident, the Žiča Bishop

165 My Masochism Ends Here, Pravda, 18 June 2008, p. 6, author: N.S.

166 Moving out of MPC Tanjug prevented again, B92, 17 June 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=06&dd=17&nav_id=304186 .

167 Statement by Association dated 17 July 2008, “Fines for TANJUG and Former General Manager”.

168 Threats to Journalist Crew of TV Jedinstvo, Blic, 20 June 2008, p. 2, author: E.H. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

Hrizostom sent a letter to all church authorities, church municipalities and monastery heads in which he banned Dečja televizija from shoot- ing churches and monasteries on the territory of Žiča diocese. Miodrag Gavrić, founder of Dečja televizija, said about the letter: “The ban is ex- plicit, sent out with a seal and personal signature from Bishop Hrizostom. However, it is obvious from the letter that we alone were banned from shooting, although RTS, Avala and some other televisions aired the foot- age independently from us. This means it is a selective action and someone wants to close us down.”169

18 July – Owner of TV Aldi from Preševo, Isuf Memeti, said that people from RTV Preševo, led by editor Ardita Behljulji, turned off the transmitter of TV Aldi located in Reljanski rit cutting off their signal. Television Preševo, which is still not privatised, did not get a broadcast frequency, while TV Aldi is the only television station with a permit to broadcast programmes in the territory of Preševo municipality and has all the manpower and technical conditions to do so. 170

14 July – Fourteen journalists of the defunct paper Kurir sport organisedd a performance entitled “Hanging the Journalists” in front of the premises of the daily Kurir in Vlajkovićeva Street in Belgrade, protesting against unpaid salaries. The journalists said the performance was their response to the owner of Kurir Rajo Rodić and his threat that the “only thing he can donate to them is money to buy a rope for hanging.”171

16 July – Boban Jovanović, assistant director for the programme of RTV Bor, received a death threat by phone when an unknown male voice told him: “Leave Bor by yourself lest you leave it horizontally.” Before that, Jovanović had publicly spoken up about the bad financial situation in this media house and said the recently appointed director, Jovan Mitrović, should be be removed from his position because he had signed, according to Jovanović, a damaging contract for RTV Bor. He also discussed such sub- jects as suspicious privatisations and problems in state-owned companies.

169 They Want to Shut Us Down, Glas javnosti, 05 July 2008, p. 32, author: B. Kuljanin.

170 Licensed RTV Aldi’s Transmitter Turned off, Danas, 19 July 2008.

171 Protest, Večernje novosti, 15 July 2008, p. 7.  60 | 61

About the incident itself Jovanović says: “This is not the first time I am threatened because of the job I do. We have tackled some topics which were forbidden and someone obviously did not like it. Despite that, I will do my job with even more quality and professionalism, but I expect the public to condemn such behaviour.” Journalist Boban Jovanović worked in Jagodina on the Klackalica (Seesaw) show with Milan Pantić, journalist who was murdered and whose killers still have not been found. 172

20 July – On the programme on local television in Bor, Saša Mirković, man- ager and president of the Board of Directors of public company Štampa, Radio i Film, accused mayor Branislav Rankić of doing his job poorly. Mirković claims that after the show he received threatening SMS from the mayor’s official number, saying: “You cretin, you have lost your mind, you will beg me to forgive you the things you were saying about me”, “You cretin, do you have a comment, or you will suck me off on Monday”, and “You communist shit, go back to Belgrade”. In a statement given after the incident Mirković said: “I fear for my life. These are very serious threats and I took them very seriously. I want to thank the police and inspec- tors who immediately accepted my criminal suit. During the show, I was called by Marković’s wife, who also threatened me the whole time. Her husband threatened to beat me up as soon as he saw me in town. I cannot understand that in a democratic system in Serbia one cannot express his political views. Because of all this, I am not capable of working either in RTV Bor or in the municipal management. I appeal to all the good-willed people in every party to condemn this and protect the media.” 173

23 July – The daily newspaper Pravda received threats in an email from a traceable address. The message said: “Fuck off, you Radicals. Something must be done about you people. I am not hiding, here’s the number of my cell phone, 063 214 69h, call me so that I and my friends can kick your ass. We have prepared all the cold weapons and firearms. Your paper is not worthy of a septic tank.” The paper reported the case to the cabinet of Serbian President Boris Tadić. 174

172 OSCE report.

173 Intrigues and Sex Affairs, Glas javnosti, 21 July 2008, p. 23, author B. Filipović.

174 Dangerous Threats from Hague Lobby, Pravda, 24 July 2008, p. 2, author: E.P. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

24 July – Tomislav Nikolić, the then vice-president of Serbian Radical Party, today president of the newly founded political party Serbian Progressive Party, threatened Radio Television Serbia twice in two days. At his party’s press conference he criticised the work of RTS and called on them to “open up towards Serbian citizens, because at least half of the public service be- longs to those citizens who do not celebrate the arrest of Karadžić”. Then he added that otherwise the Radicals would do everything to stop RTS. Asked by one of the journalists what that meant, Nikolic said: “It won’t be difficult, you all saw what happened to the Bastille.”175

26 July – In a brief text the daily Blic claimed that on orders of senior officials of the local assembly in Aleksandrovac, the assembly’s security prevented Blic’s correspondent and journalists from the local television from attend- ing the second session of the local assembly.176

[ August ] 18 August – Policemen from Kruševac prevented journalist Dragan Ilić, cor- respondent of daily Press, from photographing a traffic accident which claimed the life of one motorcyclist, and then took him to the police station with an explanation that he was obstructing the investigation. Ilić claims he felt sick during the interrogation in the station, but that he was taken to hospital only several hours later because the policemen insisted that he take an alcohol test. About the incident Ilić says: “On Sunday around 8pm I received a tip that there was a serious traffic accident in Kruševac where one motorcyclist lost his life. I took my camera and immediately went to the scene. Thirty citizens and three traffic policemen were already there. I made one snapshot from a distance of around 30 metres, from the lawn of the nearby gas station. That is when Dejan Ivanović, one of the traf- fic policemen, spotted me. He immediately started yelling at me, saying I was obstructing the investigation and asked me to leave. I explained to him that I was on assignment and showed him my press card. He said: “I don’t give a fuck who you are.” I tried to explain that I was not obstructing anyone from 30 metres. They got into my face and one of them told me:

175 RTS, Radicals and Bastille, B92, 25 July 2008.

176 Disgrace in Aleksandrovac, Blic, 27 July 2008, p. 4, author: B.N.  62 | 63

“You ask me to lose my job here, because when I kick you in the nuts, your eyes will pop out.” Until the patrol arrived, for the whole five minutes, Ivan Ivanović was threatening me that I would never forget him. The patrol arrived in several minutes with sirens and rotating lights as if they were arresting a dangerous criminal.”177

18 August – The management of the Bor media house Štampa, Radio i Film informed the public that Bor mayor Branislav Rankić had stormed their offices in a drunken state, insulting management and threatening some of them. It is said that Bor police was informed and the media house would file criminal charges against the mayor. Mayor Rankić also commented on the incident, denying everything, and saying that the only thing true about it was that he was in Radio Bor. He claims that he was completely sober, and drank a coffee there with journalists. He called the whole event a fab- rication by the firm’s management aimed at compromising him as part of their campaign to remove him from his current position.178

24 August – The director of Radio Television Panon from Subotica, Ildiko Arpaši, received a threatening SMS on her official cell phone which said: “You Hungarian whore, we planted an explosive device which will go off at 2:23pm in the offices of your fucking radio, Military Post General Ratko Mladić, 1991, Knin.” Subotica police was immediately alerted about the threat, but found nothing at the scene. 179

[ September ] 22 September – Ljiljana Stupar, correspondent of BETA news agency from Zrenjanin, received threats from an unknown male who told her he had “some photographs of her daughter” which was why “she should not stick her nose where it did not belong”. She received similar threats the previous year, because of articles that she wrote in the local press about suspicious

177 Kruševac Policemen Harass Press Correspondent, Press, 19 August 2008, p. 11, author: E.P.

178 Attack on Journalists or Political Showdown, Politika, 19 August 2008, p. A8, author: S. Todorović.

179 Threats to RTV Panon Director Ildiko Arpaši, Dnevnik, 25 August 2008, p. 8, author Z.R. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

privatisations.180 Three days later, the police found the person who threat- ened Stupar. Criminal charges were filed against Ljubiša K, aged 30, from Zrenjanin, for threatening personal safety.181

25 September – Milan Ivetić, a journalist on Večernje novosti, insulted and physically threatened Miomirka Mila Melank, journalist on Kikindske and Dnevnik. Everything happened in the Kikinda hotel Narvik where the Ser- bian Radical Party was holding a press conference. About the incident, Merlak said the following: “I took a photo of the promoted president of the local committee, Sonja Prekajski - Trumbetašev, next to whom Ivetić was sitting. He thought I was photographing him, and started cursing and insulting me. Although we haven’t communicated with one another for several years, especially after his last threats against me two years ago, Ivetić told me in a hysterical voice that he would “unscrew my head” if we by any chance published his picture in the paper. He added another nasty word or two, while I tried to explain that the person next to him was the object of my attention, and I left. The people around me, who had already started getting up, noticed that Ivetić was mad, so they started calming him down. Several minutes later, when I was packing my camera, Ivetić approached me threatening me once again. He cursed my parents, told me he taught me journalism and said that I was a bad student, that I was a pig and a mare and a series of other insults that I can’t remember right now. Journalists around me were stunned, and some of the Radicals were telling him to calm down.”182

[ October ] 01 October – The president of the Politika journalists’ collective, Ljubo- drag Stojadinović, was fired by the outgoing director of the publishing house, Srđan Janićijević. Stojadinović believes the sacking was revenge for his public appearances in which he had spoken of the poor state of this

180 BETA Correspondent Receives Serious Threats, Blic, 23 September 2008, see http://www.blic.co.yu/hronika.php?id=58044 .

181 Statement of BETA news agency, “Police Finds out Who Threatened BETA Correspondent” dated 25 September 2008. Filed in the OSCE documentation.

182 I’ll Unscrew Your Head, Dnevnik, 26 September 2008, p. 6, author: E.K.  64 | 65

media house. The NUNS issued a statement condemning the move and protesting against Politika management’s retaliation against the paper’s journalists. The statement added: “The Association thinks that this move was amoral and inadmissible, because it is revenge on the part of people forced to leave the helm of this company.” The Association concluded that “Stojadinović did not damage his paper with his statements in which he was rightfully pointing out the problems and bad climate, which was pri- marily the responsibility of the outgoing management of Politika.”183

02 October – Members of the 1389 movement and organisation Obraz, who were protesting daily against the arrest of the Hague suspect Radovan Karadžić, left a model of a swastika in front of the offices of BETA news agency. The official ideologies of these two organisations are that Jews, homosexuals and the Vatican “rule the world”. 184

05 October – A journalist from Požarevac, Igor Apostolović, received threats on Facebook because of an article he had written for the daily Danas en- titled “Call the party for job”, in which he dealt with jobs gained through party membership, focusing on local government in Požarevac where a SRS-SPS-DSS coalition holds power. About the incident, Apostolović said the following: “The said article raised a lot of dust, and culminated in threats arriving on Facebook from I K, a son of a member of the DSS, newly employed in the Centre for Culture. He recognised himself in my article, although I did not mention any names. Among the threats there were messages like: “Little man, when will you come to my place to burn your Madden 08? And my father would like to ask you some questions too”, “The story was explicitly against my father, and if it’s against him, it’s against me too. We’ll meet in the street”, “Are you taking drugs, as they say?”, “Do you know what I just told you? May God help you”. 185

23 October – Olja Bećković, journalist, editor and host of the show “Impres- sion of the Week”, broadcast on B92 television station, received a series of

183 Ljubodrag Stojadinović Sacked, B92, 2 October 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=10&dd=02&nav_id=321652 .

184 Swastikas, Danas, 3 October 2008, p. 11.

185 Facebook in the Police, Gazeta, 6 October 2008, p. 9, author: Tanja Vasić Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

serious threats on Facebook amongst which were a death threat and the most vulgar insults. A statement from RTV B92 says that threats were the result of publishing some alleged correspondence in which someone false- ly introduced as Olja Bečković insulted a 16-year-old girl who had formed a Facebook group against Serbian President Boris Tadić. B92 thinks that this Internet forgery was perpetrated in order to justify the subsequent witchhunt against Bećković.186

24 October – Hemofarm company banned two journalists of Television Pan- onija and Television TNT, Branislav Lazin and Stefan Cvetković, from reporting on the visit of Vojvodina’s Prime Minister, Bojan Pajtić, to the company. When they arrived at the gate, the guard told them they could not go in. After he learnt of the incident, Pajtić said he would have walked off the scene in protest had he known about it, which was why he post- poned his subsequent visit to Bela Crkva.187

[ November ] 04 November – The owner of the local weekly Vranjske, Vukašin Obradović, received several anonymous death threats. In a statement to OSCE repre- sentatives, Obradović emphasised that he saw the threats and pressures he had been exposed to lately as a consequence of the work of Vranjske and his articles on criminal structures in Vranje.188 One political party, after an article in which Obradović linked their political activity to the activities of the local underworld, filed a suit against Obradović in the local court, seeking several million dinars in compensation.189 Soon after, Obradović started receiving advice from sources close to the underworld to watch out, as well as telephone calls in which unknown persons started threatening to “break his legs if he resumed writing about these topics”.190 Obradović

186 Protest over Threats to Olja Bećković on Facebook, Blic, 24 October 2008, http://www.blic.co.yu/drustvo.php?id=62315 .

187 Scandalous behaviour of Hemofarm, Press, 25 October 2008, p. 8.

188 Ibid.

189 Ibid.

190 Ibid.  66 | 67

saw the most serious threat as one sent via his underage daughter. Namely, in early November, persons unknown stopped Obradović’s daughter when she was returning from school and told her: “Your father will be shot in 10 days.”191 After this, police in Vranje assigned protection to Obradović’s family home and the offices of Vranjske.

17 November – According to statements of journalists on RTV Diskos from Aleksandrovac, the only one in the area with a broadcasting license from the government’s Radio Broadcasting Agency, local municipal leaders at- tempted to tear down their transmitter. Three journalists of this media house, Goran Gašić, Vesna Dobrosavljević and Milorad Ćoćic, claim that the incident represented pressure that followed from their unbiased re- porting, and that Dobrila Vukojević, head of municipal management, Vojislav Pešterac, head of finance in the town assembly, and Milutin Radičević, director of the municipal utility company, had sent them letters in which they described employees of RTV Diskos as “hostile to munici- pal leaders, that they harboured pathological hate towards them and that they had ulterior motives”. About the incident itself they said the munici- pal heads sent people and heavy machinery to Stanjevačka poljana, where their transmitter was, in order to tear it down, but then gave up, because cameras of RTV Diskos were recording the whole event.192

26 November – The NUNS publicly criticised TV Kuršumlija’s editor, Slavko Savić, for his violent threats made against a BETA news agency and RTV B92 journalist, Ljiljana Danilović. According to the NUNS’ press release, Savić threatened the journalist, saying he would use her like a baseball bat.193

30 November – In a written statement sent to OSCE, journalists of RTV Enigma from Prijepolje claim that they were threatened by telephone on

191 Ibid.

192Municipal Officials Tried to Tear Down Transmitter, Blic, 18 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.mediacenter.org.yu/code/navigate.asp?Id=6&eventId=44009 .

193 NUNS Condemns Threats to B92 Journalist, B92, 26 November 2008, see the web page: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=11&dd=26&nav_id=330744 . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

at least five occasions this year for “reporting truthfully about the machi- nations of the Prijepolje mayor, Dragan Svičević”.194

[ December ] 9 December – Dragan Marinković, journalist and presenter of the “Opera- tion Triumph” reality show, broadcast on TV B92, publicly threatened Puls newspaper journalist Milica Crnogorac during one of this reality show episodes. Marinković said the following: “I’ll take advantage of this op- portunity to say hello to Milica Crnogorac, a journalistic scribbler who thinks she’s entitled to spit insults at myself and my colleagues. Listen Milica, mind your own business or you’ll end up in the same place as that champion of Serbian journalism, Petar Luković”. After the incident, Cr- nogorac gave the following statement: “Only in Serbia could journalists be threatened both live and in a re-run of the episode the way Dragan Marinković did it in his show on TV B92 on both Saturday and Sunday. Marinković’s public and unambiguous open threats, which he read out from a paper that he had prepared in advance, testify to the seriousness of what has befallen me. Marinković sent a message to me in public, before an audience of several million viewers, that I would ‘fare the same as Petar Luković’. And what did happen to journalist Luković? Well, several years ago he was beaten up over an article.”195

2 December – Press daily carried news that the leader of the New Serbia po- litical party and former minister for capital investments, Velimir Ilić, ver- bally abused this journalist when she tried to take his statement concern- ing an alleged traffic accident in which he had been involved. When asked if he would pay damages to the taxi driver, according to Press, Ilić started shouting, “What bloody damages are you talking about? My vehicle wasn’t damaged! I couldn’t care less about some moron! Yeah, we’ll swap our cars as compensation! I’ll give him a bloody jeep! Get off my back! I’ve had it up to here!”.196

194 Written statement by journalist of RTV Enigma. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

195 Maca Threatens Puls Journalist, 24 sata, 10 December 2008, p. 16, author: D. Farkaš.

196 Velja Ilić Insulted Press journalist, Press, 3 December 2008, p. 2, author: J. Velinović.  68 | 69

8 December – Aleksandrovac’s mayor, Jugoslav Stajkovac, attacked a TV Dis- kos cameraman, Igor Mladenović, while he was trying to film a meeting of the municipal public utility labour union. Milanović gave the follow- ing statement about the incident: “Stajkovac came to the meeting of the municipal public utility labour union, and, in front of over one hundred workers, he barked out an order to me to switch off my camera and leave immediately. When I refused to do so, he pushed away the lenses with his right hand, and threatened to smash the camera if I continued filming. At that point Boško Pavlović, chairman of the public utility labour union, re- acted and explained to Stajkovac that he had invited journalists. Stajkovac said in an angry voice that Pavlović should make up his mind, and then left the meeting”.197

197 Local Mayor Attacked Cameraman, Blic, 9 December 2008, http://www.unsonline.org/sr-Latn-CS/content/vesti/2342/predsednik-op%C5%A1tine-napao- kamermana.xhtml . Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

C. COURT VERDICTS WHICH SENTENCED JOURNALISTS

[ January ] 24 January – A Belgrade Second Municipal Court ruling sentenced Predrag Popović, editor-in-chief of Pravda and the newspaper’s publisher, to pay a fine of 250,000 dinars and compensation for court expenses of 68,000 dinars for slandering Vladimir Popović. Under the threat of a new fine, the court banned the paper from violating the rights and personality of Popović in future. The suit was filed over a text entitled “Political twilight of Beba Popović and Čeda Jovanović – prison awaits them”, published by Pravda on 20 June, 2007.198

[ March ] 08 March – Kikinda municipal court sentenced Sonja Trumbetašev – Preka- jski, editor-in-chief of Kikindske novine to a fine of 10,000 dinars. She was sued by Mila Melank from the Information Centre Kikinda, over a text entitled “Mila’s Witchhunt”, which, among other things, said that director Mila Melank, editor-in-chief Gordana Bulatović, and the paper’s editor, Željko Bodrožić, were “conflicting personalities, in constant clash with their environment and law,” and “in other times they would have be car- rying chains, breaking rock and would certainly have ended up burning at the stake”.199

198 Pravda to Pay Damages to Popović, B92, 25 January 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=01&dd=25&nav_id=282080 .

199 Municipal Court Fines Editor of Former Municipal Newspaper, Dnevnik, 08 March 2008, p. 38, author: E.K. http://www.kikinda.cc/moduli.php?naziv=prilozi&file=clanak&sid=2796 .  70 | 71

[ May ] 09 May – Journalist of Pečat from Užice Uglješa Mrdić was sentenced by Užice district court to pay a fine of 30,000 dinars for slandering the dismissed head of OUP Priboj, Dragan Ješić. The Association of Serbian Journalists reports the statement by the staff of Pečat which says: “Pečat appeals to all state bodies and institutions, as well as to journalists’ associations in Serbia, to prevent dishonourable actions in the Serbian judiciary, and not to let journalists suffer only because they are doing their job professionally and come under attack from certain state officials who think their work must not subject to comment.”200

20 May – Nevena Stojčević, former editor of the defunct daily Internacion- al, was ordered by Belgrade’s Fourth Municipal Court to pay a fine of 50,000 dinars for libel in articles that claimed that Veselin Šljivančanin and Dragoljub Milanović were arrested on the orders of Vladimir “Beba” Popović.201

[ July ] 01 July – Belgrade district court ordered journalist Dragan Stojković to pay 350,000 dinars in compensation to the vice-president of the Serbian Radi- cal Party, Dragan Todorović, for causing the latter emotional pain plus 145,000 dinars in court expenses. Stojković inflicted emotional pain on Todorović in an article from September 2002, about the snatching of a television camera from the crew of TV Mreža in June 2000, for which Branislav Gavrilović, the then bodyguard of Dragan Todorović, was ac- cused. Stojković had said in the text that Todorović “probably ordered the theft”.202

200 Journalist Mrdić Fined for Slander, Glas javnosti, 07 June 2008, p. 10.

201 Popović Wins Case against Internacional, B92, 21 May 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=05&dd=20&nav_id=299478 .

202 Todorović Awarded 350,000 for Mental Anguish, Press, 2 July 2008, p. 4. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

[ October ] 02 October – Kragujevac district court ruled that the weekly Svetlost, in a text published in the letters column, damaged the honour, reputation and dignity of this court’s judge, Simonida Miloradović. 203

02 October – Ilija Dimitrijević, editor-in-chief of the private weekly Reč nar- oda, from Požarevac, was sentenced by the municipal court in Požarevac to pay a fine of 20,000 dinars for criminal libel. If he did not pay within the legal deadline, the sentence would be changed to a prison sentence of 20 days. Besides, Dimitrijević would have to pay court expenses of 25,400 dinars. The process against Dimitrijević was held over the series of articles published in Reč naroda about Momčilo Veljković, coordinator of the Ot- por movement and Mileta Veljković, a local journalist.204

29 October – Sremska Mitrovica municipal court sentenced Hanibal Kovač, a journalist from Šabac, to pay the fine of 18,000 dinars for two insults, and the fine was replaced with a prison sentence of three months because there was no way to collect the money by force. At the time, Kovač was writing for the local papers about nepotism in Šabac’s courts.205

203 Fined over Reader’s Letter, B92, 3 October 2008.

204 Editor Fined for Slander, Glas javnosti, 3 October 2008, p. 21, author: D. Novković.

205 Sentenced in Proceedings He Was Not Aware of, B92, 29 October 2008, http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=10&dd=29&nav_id=325886 .  72 | 73

VI | Media rights and freedoms in Serbia The OSCE conducted this part of the survey in conjunction with the Institute from Belgrade, based on a questionnaire distributed to 439 media outlets in Serbia. Out of this number, eligible replies were received from 306 media edi- tors.

The principal objective of the survey, envisaged as the first phase of a system- atic monitoring of violations of media freedoms and rights in Serbia in 2008, was to assess the true extent to which media freedoms and rights in Serbia in 2008 are threatened, i.e. to examine the spread, forms, intensity and fac- tors exerting pressure on the media and inciting attacks on and threats to the media and journalists. The survey also entailed an assessment of perceptions of media editors and journalists who had been exposed to pressures, attacks or threats, as regards the reasons for the undermining of media freedoms and rights, the possible consequences of the said pressures and attacks, and meas- ures for the better protection of media freedoms in future.

A particular objective of the survey was to assess, on the basis of insight into available data, the threats posed to media freedoms and rights in Serbia in two periods over the course of 2008 (until 17 February, i.e. the declaration of Kosovo independence, and afterwards, until the moment the survey was conducted), as well as in the whole year as a control time period. The aim was to see if the Kosovo crisis led to an escalation of threats to media freedoms and rights in Serbia, or if the scope of threats to media freedoms and rights was relatively constant.

In the survey, media freedom entails freedom of expression, freedom to gath- er, publish and disseminate information, freedom of information flow and Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

media openness to different opinions, freedom of editorial policy and media independence, right of access to information, right to monitor and criticise the government and public institutions, and other professional rights of jour- nalists that do not undermine the rights and reputation of others, general security and public order. For the purpose of the survey, attacks on journalists and media entail any form of violation of media rights and freedoms involv- ing the use of force, threats or various types of pressures motivated by the reporting of a particular media outlet or journalist, or the very fact that the person assaulted is a journalist.

Survey method

The survey was conducted by polling two principal sets of respondents – ed- itors-in-chief of media outlets in Serbia and media professionals who were exposed to physical assaults and threats in relation to their coverage of the Kosovo’s declaration independence in February 2008. Among the news media polled were news agencies, daily, weekly and other periodical newspapers and news magazines, and radio and TV stations based in Serbia with significant news production. Media professionals who came under attack were journalists, photographers/ reporters, cameramen and other members of journalistic crews in the field. Two types of questionnaires were used in the survey. One was intended for media managers and served to gather general data about the media outlet in question, assessments of media freedoms and specific cases of violations of media freedoms and rights, while the other, shorter, questionnaire was in- tended for media professionals who had been targets of physical attacks or threats, and focused on the circumstances surrounding the attack in ques- tion.

Sample As there is no official register of media outlets in Serbia, the basic set of me- dia outlets whose managers were to be polled was compiled on the basis of  74 | 75

available data on media outlets, their activities and contact information from several sources, above all, the media directories of professional associations, organisations and media themselves, more specifically: The Journalists’ As- sociation of Serbia, The Independent Association of Journalists of Serbia, The Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina, ANEM, Lokal Press, Media Centre from Belgrade and Media Centre from Vranje, The Centre for Media Professionalisation, The Novi Sad Journalists’ School, RTV B92, The Balkan Investigative Reporting Network, the Republican Public Broadcasting Agency’s list of radio and TV stations which were granted local, regional and national broadcast permits, as well as lists of media outlets on various web sites. By combining these data, a preliminary list of 652 newspapers, radio and TV stations, and RTV companies was compiled. Internet media outlets were not registered as separate since media companies did not treat them as separate media. This was also due to the fact that there was not enough data on them and that their output was different from the standard news output of the media which were the focal point of the survey. Media outlets that were not relevant to this survey’s objective were removed from the list: illustrated entertainment and specialised print media (children’s, women’s, computer publications, etc.), religious media, predominantly enter- tainment media outlets, and non-existent media, i.e. the media which had ceased to exist according to information obtained by researchers themselves (e.g., dailies Nacional and Balkan, the weeklies Reporter and Evropa, Radio Jat, Radio Kontakt, Radio Pingvin, Radio SKC, etc.). The list compiled in such a manner was still not complete and credible for the purpose of the survey. Namely, in order to establish contact with the re- spondents, information pertaining to the names of media outlets, their head- quarters, type, postal address, telephone number, email address and names of editors-in-chief were needed. The list at this stage lacked much of the neces- sary data and the existing information proved to be inaccurate or outdated in many cases. Also, it was not possible to distinguish between active and non-existing or still not operating radio and TV stations, i.e. it was not pos- sible to see in the Public Broadcasting Agency’s list of broadcasters with valid licenses which outlets were in the process of formation in order to become fully operational. At the same time, without specific checks, it was not possible to determine which radio and TV stations were still operating even though Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

they had been denied broadcasting licenses. These were also relevant media outlets as they were active when the survey was conducted. An additional problem was how to make a distinction between the list of media outlets and the list of editors as the principal respondent target group. Namely, the survey relied on a definition according to which a separate radio or TV channel constituted a media outlet (e.g., Radio Beograd Channel 1 and Radio Beograd Channel 2 were treated as separate media outlets), hence the original intention in the survey was to include as respondents editors- in-chief of radio and TV channels that were a part of a radio and television broadcaster bearing the same name. Some radio and television broadcasters indeed have different editors for radio and TV programmes, whereas in some media companies the same person was the editor-in-chief of both radio and TV channels. In such cases, the media company was treated as one media outlet (RTV broadcaster) unlike those that were classified as either radio or TV media outlets. Having vetted the existing data in the list mentioned above and after gath- ering new data, all those media outlets which were found to be no longer operational, which were not active as yet, which were found not to have rel- evant news output of their own or which were predominantly focused on commercial and entertainment programme, were excluded from the list. In the second round of the vetting process, media outlets from Kosovo were also excluded because their list was incomplete, basic data were missing, and the conclusion inferred was that their problems were different from the problems experienced by the majority of media outlets in Serbia. Their inclusion in the survey population would have painted a different picture overall concerning the subject matter of our survey. The final list was reduced to 439 media outlets – 97 newspapers, 205 radio stations and 137 TV stations. If all RTV broadcasters had separate editors-in- chief for their respective radio and TV channels, the total target population would be 517 editors. As part of the survey, 306 media editors were polled. Originally, 328 filled- in questionnaires were collected but 18 were eliminated as they had failed to meet the criteria for sample selection (media outlets without own news output, inadequate professional status of respondents, duplication of media outlets, etc.).  76 | 77

Due to the incompleteness of credible data on active news media outlets in Serbia, and discrepancies between the number of media outlets and the number of editors-in-chief, it was difficult to estimate the share in percentage points of those surveyed in the entire population. With respect to the final list of 439 media outlets, the sample included 69.7% of them. Out of 517 editors, 59.2% participated in the survey. The sample was sufficiently representative in several aspects. If broken down by the type of media outlet, the sample consisted of 41.5% editors of radio sta- tions, 22.2% editors of TV stations, 11.4% editors of RTV broadcasters, 13.1% editors of weekly newspapers, 6.2% editors of other periodical newspapers, 3.9% editors of daily papers and 1.3% editors of news agencies. With respect to target audience, 49% were editors of local media outlets, 36.6% editors of regional media, and 13.1% national media editors. It is important to note that the classification of media outlets into local, regional and national media was based on the statements of editors-in-chief themselves vis-à-vis target groups for their media outlets. Editors-in-chief participating in the survey represented media outlets from 93 cities and towns from all the regions in Serbia. Among them, 49.3% were editors of media from Central Serbia, 37.6%, editors of media outlets from Vojvodina, and 13.1% were editors of Belgrade media. Despite repeated ef- forts to include in the survey several big media outlets from Belgrade (Poli- tika, Večernje novosti, Kurir, Glas javnosti, TV Pink, TV Fox, Radio Fokus and Radio S), this did not come to pass owing to the lack of cooperation on the part of their editors-in-chief. The sample had 96% media outlets from urban centres and 4% from rural areas. With respect to the year in which they were established, the sample featured media outlets of different “ages” – 28.1% had been founded before 1990, 44.4% came into existence between 1990 and 2000, and 24.9% were media outlets founded since 2000. The questionnaire was intended, above all, for editors-in-chief as represent- atives of media professionals who exercise their media freedoms and have professional interest in the media as such, as opposed to directors who are a part of managing structures. Deputy editors, i.e. assistants to editors-in-chief and news editors of electronic media were also included as representatives Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

of media management staff. The majority of respondents are indeed editors- in-chief – 49.7%, as well as editors-in-chief who are also directors of their media outlets – 14.4%, while 1.3% of those surveyed are persons who have aggregated the roles of owner, director and editor-in-chief. The sample also includes 5.6% deputy editors-in-chief, 4.6% news editors and 12.7% media outlet directors. There is no information about the positions of persons who filled in 11.4% of questionnaires. However, given that the questionnaires were addressed to editors-in-chief, a realistic assumption would be that they were filled in by editors themselves or their close associates. Defining the second principal set of respondents – journalists or other me- dia employees who were targeted in physical attacks or threats – was based on information gathered from several sources: media reports on attacks, data collected by professional associations and information provided by media ed- itors. Having identified either individual journalists or media outlets whose journalists were physically or verbally assaulted, these were distributed spe- cially designed questionnaires. Some victims were reluctant to fill in the ques- tionnaire, citing the traumatic nature of experiences that they would rather not recall.

Techniques and the course of survey

The complexity and sensitivity of the matter at hand and the specific target group that was the subject of the survey, as well as related difficulties in reach- ing respondents, entailed the use of several different survey techniques and several phases in the survey. The process of gathering data in the first phase was carried out by email. Ques- tionnaires were distributed in electronic form to available email addresses of media outlets with a note saying they were personally intended for the edi- tors-in-chief, or were sent to their personal email addresses if available, with a note soliciting their participation in the survey and explaining the subject matter and objective of the survey, alongside the procedure for filling in the questionnaire and sending it back to the Institute’s email address. Question- naires and accompanying notes were distributed to about 350 different email addresses in several “waves” (at least three times to each address).  78 | 79

Due to incomplete and outdated available information (non-existent ad- dresses, inaccurate addresses, invalid addresses, addresses not used anymore or rarely used, addresses used by marketing departments of media outlets instead of journalists, inaccurate information concerning the names of edi- tors-in-chief, etc.), but also the low response rate of editors who received the questionnaire in electronic form (in response to the first “wave” of question- naires that were sent out, only 54 replies were received), in the second phase the media were contacted by telephone. In telephone conversations with ei- ther media managers or members of newsroom staff, respondents were again asked to take part in the survey. In the process, data on media outlets and editors-in-chief were updated. They were asked if they would prefer to have the questionnaire sent to them by email or some other way, such as post or fax. The editors of media about which there were no data whatsoever except for a postal address received the questionnaire by post. A large majority of potential respondents reacted positively in the course of the direct telephone conversations to the objective of the survey. Only three editors flatly refused to take part. Editors were offered a possibility of filling in the questionnaire anonymously, i.e. leaving the fields pertaining to the name of the media outlet and its headquarters blank, but only 16 editors (5%) opted to do so. Respondents, however, often complained that they were too busy or sought an extension of the deadline for returning the filled-in question- naire. One should note that the survey was conducted during the campaigns for elections at several levels in Serbia, which increased the workload of edi- tors-in-chief, and that there were two major holidays (several days for Easter and May Day). Following several telephone conversations, the number of re- spondents rose but was still insufficient to constitute a representative sample. Hence, the Institute launched the third phase of the survey – the engagement of field researchers who were to contact those media editors with whom no contact had been established due to lack of data as well as those media edi- tors who had promised to participate in the survey but had failed to send in their answers. Field researchers conducted face-to-face interviews with these editors-in-chief or used printed questionnaires which they themselves filled in. Thus, the participation of exactly half of the editors (164) was ensured. Data were gathered from 4 April until 19 May 2008. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

Out of the collected filled-in questionnaires, 40% were received via email, 50% - thanks to the assistance of field researchers, 5% by fax, and the remain- ing 5% by post. The contents of collected questionnaires were numbered, coded and entered into a statistics programme after which percentage analysis and contingency table analysis were carried out.  80 | 81

A. . PERCEPTION OF GENERAL STATUS OF MEDIA RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

General assessment of the state of media freedom

The majority of media managers describe the state of media rights and freedoms in Serbia today in negative terms. Eighty-five of 100 editors-in-chief believe that the high incidence of attacks on media is a very serious (32%) or fairly serious problem (53%) in Serbian society.

Only every tenth respondent is of the opinion that the existing pressures, threats and physical attacks are not a burden for society as a whole.

question: media freedom as a social problem?

All editors agree that attacks on the media represent a serious social problem, regardless of the type of media outlet, target audience, regional headquarters or the date of establishment of a media outlet. More significant differences in as- sessments of the importance of this problem emerge solely in relation to practi- Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

cal experience with attacks on media. Of editors who have experienced restric- tions to professional freedoms, only 2.5% believe the degree of threat to media freedoms today is not a serious problem for society, while 18% of editors who have not had such an experience hold the same view. Ostvarivanje medijskih sloboda

Enjoyment of media freedoms in practice

According to media editors, the main problem concerning media freedom comes down to its enjoyment in practice rather than legal and institutional guarantees for media freedoms and rights.

Two thirds of those surveyed (65%) describe the enjoyment of media freedoms and rights in practice in negative terms. The majority (61%) believe that there are serious obstacles in Serbia today to the enjoyment of media freedoms, while 4% are even more critical, saying that conditions are not in place to exercise media freedoms in practice.

question: assessment of practical enjoyment of media freedom  82 | 83

The former view is most widespread among print media editors (73%), par- ticularly daily newspaper editors (92%), editors of media outlets founded be- fore 1990 (66%), editors whose media outlets were targeted (75%) and among editors in northwest Serbia (77%) and the Kraljevo region (67%).

Few editors are of the opinion that media rights and freedoms are fully en- joyed in practice (3%). Others – over a quarter (29%) – say that only sporadic incidents threaten media freedoms in practice. This view is mostly shared by TV and RTV editors as opposed to editors of other types of media outlets (34%), national media editors (33%), those who have experienced specific pressures, threats or physical assaults (42%) and editors from South Serbia (35%).

Media freedom legal regulations

Editors-in-chief assess in different terms two fundamental assumptions – le- gal and institutional ones needed for enjoyment of media rights and freedoms in practice. While there is no a majority positive view among them in relation to either the former or the latter, they do believe, however, that legal regula- tions provide better guarantees for media freedoms than the existing institu- tions and mechanisms for the implementation of the law.

Editors’ views on how appropriately the current laws regulate media freedoms and rights are almost totally divided. In the two opposite camps, those with moderate views are predominant. About one half of the respondents (49%) believe the laws are good (of whom 3% say the laws are very good), whereas the other half (48%) argue that laws are inadequate (of whom 9% say that the existing laws are very poor).

Editors of printed periodicals are more positive in their assessment of the laws’ adequacy than the average (53%), editors of media outlets founded between 1990 and 2000 (55%), editors of media outlets which have not been exposed to attacks in the past year and a half (58%), and editors from eastern Serbia (58%), Šumadija and Pomoravlje – central Serbia (57%) and southwest Serbia Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

(56%). By contrast, media laws are seen as inappropriate mostly by editors of weekly papers (50%), national media outlets (50%), media founded after 2000 (54%), those who have been exposed to attacks (56%), as well as media editors from Belgrade, Vojvodina and South Serbia (52-53%).

question: does the law in serbia today appropriately regulate media freedoms and rights?

Institutional guarantees of media freedoms

While half of the editors-in-chief believe the law regulates media freedoms and rights in an appropriate manner, an absolute majority say no adequate institutions and mechanisms are in place in Serbia today to implement the media laws (courts, various state organs, regulatory agencies, self-regulatory agencies, professional associations, etc.).

Namely, 59% of those surveyed hold a negative view of institutions and their procedures when it comes to the enforcement of the law. Among them, 17% have a distinctly negative view. Thirty-nine per cent of the editors-in-chief subscribe to the opinion that there are institutional guarantees for media freedoms, while 3% hold a very positive view of the current situation.  84 | 85

question: are there adequate institutions and mechanisms in serbia today to implement media laws?

A critical stance towards the existence and work of the institutions supposed to protect media freedoms is held by editors of media that have experienced attacks lately (69%), weekly and periodical newspaper editors (68% each) and editors of RTV broadcasters (67%), national media outlets, media founded before 1990 (63% each) and editors from Belgrade (70%), Vojvodina (61%) and eastern Serbia (63%). By contrast, an above-average positive view is a tak- en by editors of media outlets founded between 1990 and 2000 (55%), editors of radio and TV broadcasters (43% each), media which have not experienced attacks lately (49%), and, regionally, editors from Šumadija and Pomoravlje in central Serbia (65%).

Comparison with neighbouring countries

The majority of editors-in-chief (53%) believe that the state of media freedoms and rights is approximately the same in Serbia as it is in most neighbouring countries undergoing transition. Among those media editors who disagree, twice as many describe the situation in Serbia as worse than in neighbouring Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

countries (17%) as those who think the situation in Serbia with respect to media freedoms is better than elsewhere in the region (8%).

However, a significant number of editors, one-fifth of those polled, to be more precise, say they are not in a position to compare the situation in Serbia with other countries as they lack the necessary information on the state of media freedoms elsewhere.

question: how do media freedoms in serbia compare with neighbouring countries?

Similarities between Serbia and most neighbouring countries undergoing transition with respect to media freedoms are most often perceived by editors of weekly newspapers (58%) RTV broadcasters (57%), media outlets founded between 1990 and 2000 (61%) and media outlets based in southwest Serbia (69%) and Šumadija and Pomoravlje in central Serbia (64%). That the situ- ation in Serbia is comparatively worse is a view mostly held by daily news- paper editors (42%), editors of media outlets founded before 1990 (23%), editors whose media outlets have been subject to attacks (24%) and media editors from Belgrade (25%) and Vojvodina (24%). Optimistic assessments are present above average among radio editors (12%), editors whose media outlets have not been targeted (14%) as well as editors of media outlets based in South Serbia (21%), Šumadija and Pomoravlje (14%).  86 | 87

B. PERCEPTION OF FACTORS RELATED TO MEDIA FREEDOMS, SOURCES AND MOST FREQUENT FORMS OF THREATS TO MEDIA FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS

What the state of media freedoms depends on

In the opinion of the majority of media editors, factors from the outside rather than within the media system determine the current state of media freedoms and rights. Almost two-thirds of editors-in-chief (65%) hold the view that media freedoms mostly depend on general social context in which the media operate (the transition phase which society is undergoing, political relations, dominant values in society, etc.). Of those factors in the media sphere seen by editors-in-chief as crucial, the following stand out: economic capacity of the media (55%) and professionalism of journalists (47%), i.e., the level of educa- tion, compliance with professional and ethical norms, degree of self-censorship, etc. These two factors are seen as more important than the behaviour of media owners or the general position of the media in the society, which is regulated by laws but also influenced by the attitude of centres of power towards journalists. Editors believe that the degree of media freedom also depends on the level of professional organisation and solidarity but this element is rarely singled out as the most influential factor (19%).

The view that it is general social conditions that most influence media freedoms is less common among radio editors (61%) than editors of other media (73-75%), but it is somewhat more prevalent among editors of regional and local media (73-61%) than among editors of national media (55%). Me- dia editors in central parts of Serbia are more inclined to this view (70-79%) than editors in other parts of the country (62-65%). Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

question: which factors determine the state of media freedoms and rights?

Daily newspaper editors attach the most importance to the economic posi- tion of media outlets vis-à-vis the achieved level of media freedoms (75% as opposed to 57% or less for editors of other types of media). More local media editors believe that the economic position of media outlets (57%) is important than regional and national media editors (42%) and editors from South Serbia and Kraljevo-Pomoravlje region (62-60% as opposed to 46-56% of editors from other regions, and 35% of editors from Šumadija).

The impact of journalists’ professionalism on media freedom is considered crucial, above all, by editors of news agencies and weekly magazines (60% as opposed to 42-45% of editors of other types of media). Journalists’ profession- alism is seen as more important by editors of national media outlets (57%) than local and regional media editors (48-42%), editors of media founded after 2001 (51% as opposed to 43% of editors of media founded between 1990 and 2000), and editors from Šumadija, South and southeastern Serbia (56-  88 | 89

57% as opposed to 45-50% of media editors from other parts of the country and 29% of editors from eastern Serbia).

Who undermines media freedoms

With respect to the sources of encroachment upon media freedoms, editors- in-chief hold the view that the gravest violations come from the three follow- ing sources: economic centres of power, state structures and political parties and organisations. There are only slight discrepancies in the way that media editors have ranked the said three sources with respect to their impact on the work of journalists: 47% believe that the gravest violations of media freedoms stem from economic centres of power; 46% say they originate from state bod- ies and institutions; as many editors hold the view (46%) that political parties and organisations are to blame for the gravest violations of media freedoms.

question: what are the sources of gravest media freedom violations? Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

There are certain differences in perception of the impact by economic and state power centres among the editors of media classified for the purposes of the survey according to relevant criteria. Editors of Belgrade media out- lets (70%), print media (61%), and national media (65%) estimate more often than others that the gravest violations of media freedom come from weilders of economic power. The authorities are more often seen as the most impor- tant source of violation of media freedoms by local media editors (48%) than editors of regional (46%) and national media (40%). Media editors from east- ern Serbia (71%) tend to hold this view more often than editors-in-chief in other regions (31%-57%). Those who have experienced violations of media freedoms and rights in the past two years (51%) are more inclined to see the government as the most important source of violation of media freedoms than those who have not had such experiences (40%).

The impact of other potential sources of violations of media freedoms, when contrasted to the three sources mentioned above, is seen by editors as less im- portant. Nearly every fifth respondent (18.6%) cites criminal circles as perpe- trators of gravest forms of violations of media freedoms, and for every tenth respondent, these are ideologically organised groups (9.5%). Even less signifi- cance is attached to deviant individuals (5.9%), while the least is attributed to actions of journalists themselves, although a considerable number of editors- in-chief believe that journalists often abuse the freedom of the press.

Forms of media freedom violations

Media editors assess that three forms of violations of media freedoms are pre- dominant in Serbia today: economic pressures, political pressures, and physi- cal assaults and threats to journalists. These three forms of violations are cited most often by every third editor-in-chief who is familiar with the operations of other media outlets, apart from the one that he/she works for. The differ- ences in assessments of the incidence of these violations are minor.

Economic pressure, i.e. economic insecurity and dependence, including also unfair competition, is most often cited as universal by 24% of media editors.  90 | 91

This is followed by physical assaults and threats to journalists (23%). It is sig- nificant that 153 out of 306 respondents say that their media outlets or jour- nalists were targeted in attacks or threats in 2008, of whom 79 see the attacks and threats as a general characteristic of the media situation in Serbia. Politi- cal pressure (21%) ranks third, and this is associated by media editors with government officials (“arrogance of government officials”, “abuse of power”), often local government officials. This sort of violation of media freedoms mostly affects still unprivatised media outlets. Editors also highlight conceal- ment and inaccessibility of information of public importance, secretiveness of state agencies vis-à-vis journalists, and the government’s lack of transparency (11%). This effectively points to the fact that the Free Access to Information of Public Importance Act is not being implemented, and is a significant and common obstacle to media freedoms.

question: what are the most frequent forms of the violation of media freedom in serbia? Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

As a frequent form of violation of media freedoms, editors also cite unprofes- sional conduct of journalists themselves (8%). Typically, these are failure to comply with the rules and ethical code of conduct, journalists’ political activ- ism as part of their professional work, and self-censorship.

Existing media regulations and judicial practice, i.e. inadequately regulated status of media outlets and journalists, conduct of regulatory agencies, ad- ministration and judicial bodies, unsolved murders and attempts on the lives of journalists, as well as charges brought against journalists, also stand out as sources of violations of media freedoms as perceived by media editors (5%).

How to advance media freedom

Editors-in-chief see the main reasons for the unfavourable state of media freedoms and rights in systemic factors, but also advocate a series of con- crete actions and measures that could improve the situation in future. The majority of desirable measures pertains to the treatment of physical assaults and threats. The most desirable measure for the advancement of media rights and freedoms would be to treat attacks on journalists in the same manner as attacks on on-duty public servants (52%). This is followed by: harsher pun- ishments for perpetrators of attacks and threats (38%), more efficient court proceedings against the perpetrators (33%); more effective police action to identify and track down perpetrators of physical and verbal violence against journalists (30%).

Treatment of an attack on a journalist as an attack on a public official is the most desirable measure in all the categories of media editors, and this is par- ticularly emphasised by editors from northwest Serbia (77%) and South Ser- bia (71%). Belgrade media editors, in particular, stress the need for harsher punishments for perpetrators of attacks and threats (43%).

Nearly one-third of editors (30%) believe that media freedoms would be en- hanced by amendments to the law that qualifies libel and slander as criminal offences, whereas slightly fewer editors (28%) see the solution primarily in a  92 | 93

higher degree of journalist professionalism, ethics and self-criticism. A con- siderable number of editors (29%) think media freedoms would be also en- hanced by better protection of employees from arbitrary decisions of media outlet owners (e.g. by signing a collective contract).

question: what concrete steps would advance media freedom?

The answers provided by editors-in-chief show that the least is expected from giving more publicity to instances of violations of media freedoms (14%) and activities of professional journalist associations (21%). Some editors have de- scribed such a publicity as already significant, i.e. professional associations are already sufficiently focused on this issue. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

C. VIOLATION OF MEDIA FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS IN 2008

Out of 306 editors-in-chief participating in the survey, exactly half, i.e. 153 (50%) stated that their media outlets and journalists had been exposed to some sort of restriction to their media rights and freedoms in 2008.

Of 153 targeted media, 11 had been exposed to physical or verbal attacks during the week following the declaration of Kosovo’s independence, 44 were exposed to various forms of attacks and pressures in relation to their Kosovo coverage, while 149 had the same experience but in relation to their reporting on other issues.

question: violations of media freedom in 

In order to assess the proportions of threats to media freedom in relation to both reporting on the Kosovo crisis and unrelated coverage, instances of violations of media freedoms with respect to these two types of coverage were treated separately in the questionnaire.  94 | 95

Media freedom violations in relation to Kosovo issue coverage

In the week marked by the dramatic events occurring in the wake of Kosovo’s declaration of independence, a large number of physical attacks on reporters took place while they were carrying out their professional assignments. Ac- cording to available data from media reports and statements given as part of the survey by editors-in-chief and media professionals who were attacked, at least 30 journalists, photographers/journalists, cameramen or members of their field crews (24 domestic and six foreign crews) from 12 domestic media outlets (BETA and FONET news agencies, newspapers Večernje novosti, Alo!, Glas javnosti, Naša reč, Subotičke novine, RTV broadcasters RTS, B92, Studio B, TV5-Niš and Radio KIM) and six foreign media outlets (Croatian RTL TV, TV Republika Srpska, Russian TV in English language, Russia Today, German ARD TV, Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad and Portuguese Radio TSF) were targeted in attacks.

Also, during the first two weeks in the aftermath of Kosovo’s declaration of independence, media professionals from seven media outlets – RTV B92, TV Fox, TV Panonija, TV 5 (Užice), Sremska TV, newspaper Alo! and Radio Bum 93 – were targeted in physical attacks and verbal violence.

Of 17 domestic media outlets whose reporters were exposed to physical as- saults or attempted attacks and verbal threats, editors of 11 media outlets par- ticipated in the survey (4% of those polled) – BETA news agency, the newspa- pers Alo! and Subotičke novine, RTV B92, RTV Srbije, TV Studio B, TV5-Niš, TV Panonija, TV5-Užice, Sremska TV and Radio Bum 93.

Excluding attacks in the field and threats during the said dramatic week, 44 editors (14 of those surveyed) stated that their media outlets and journalists were targeted in other forms of violations of media freedoms related to the Kosovo issue in 2008. These were mostly anonymous, verbal threats or threats in writing, addressed to the media outlet or to journalists. Twenty-five editors cited such threats (57% of the said 44, i.e. 8% of those polled), while eight edi- tors said that their media outlets had been exposed to “name-calling” in other media. Physical assaults on employees occurred in three instances and one attack occurred on the offices. Four media outlets were exposed to political pressures; to economic pressure – three media outlets; and two media experi- Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

enced pressure on the part of media owners. Four media outlets were exposed to pressures exerted by organised groups, while charges were brought against three media outlets.

question: what form did violations of media freedoms in  take in relation to coverage of kosovo issue?

Attacks and threats with physical assaults occurred during violent protests against the declaration of Kosovo independence in Belgrade, Niš, Novi Sad, Subotica, Užice and at border crossings with Kosovo (Jarinje and Mutivode) in which various organised groups were involved (sports fans, army reserv- ists, Kosovo municipalities’ residents, secondary school students, etc.). In most cases, protesters were the perpetrators of attacks on reporters. In three cases, journalists were attacked and beaten by riot police. In two instances, the attacks took place in front of police officers who did nothing to protect reporters carrying out their professional assignments.  96 | 97

question: reasons for attacks on media in relation to coverage of kosovo issue?

According to statements by editors-in-chief, attacks, threats and pressures on journalists in relation to Kosovo coverage were most often accompanied by accusations of unpatriotic editorial policies. These were cited by 51% of editors who were exposed to some sort of attack in relation to their Kosovo coverage.

The next most often cited reason for attacks on the media, according to those polled, was politically biased editorial policy (24%). Thirteen per cent of edi- tors said that preventing journalists from gathering data on participants in the events was the reason for attacks on those journalists.

Other alleged reasons for attacks and pressures were less prominent: unpro- fessional/unethical reporting (11%) and violations of personal rights and in- terests (6%). Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

Media freedom violations in relation to reporting on other issues (except Kosovo)

About half (49%) of the editors-in-chief, 149 to be precise, said they had been exposed to some form of restriction to their media freedom in the first quar- ter of 2008, which was unrelated to events in Kosovo and their reporting on those events.

As the most frequent forms of violations of media freedoms in this period, media editors listed political pressures (41%), then pressures and “name-call- ing” in other media (28%), anonymous threats (26%) and economic pressures exerted by advertisers and other economically powerful figures (22%).

question:what forms did violation of media freedoms, unrelated to coverage of the kosovo issue, take in ?

Political pressures were dominant in all the media outlets which experienced attacks, irrespective of the type of media outlet (31% of print media editors,  98 | 99

38% of radio editors, 51% of TV editors, and 55% of RTV broadcaster edi- tors). When the results are broken down by geographical coverage, the situa- tion is as follows: 50% of local media editors, 34% of regional media editors and 33% of national media editors. If we look at regional aspect of this issue, political pressures are seen as most common by 58% of editors in eastern Serbia, 56% in northwest Serbia and 44% in Vojvodina.

Economic pressures are cited more often by editors of Belgrade-based media (38%) while anonymous threats are most frequently mentioned by editors from South Serbia (43%) and eastern Serbia (42%).

Reasons for attacks on media outlets in relation to other issues (other than Kosovo)

According to statements by editors-in-chief, in the first quarter of 2008, me- dia outlets were most often targeted in attacks over alleged politically biased and unpatriotic editorial policies, even when their reporting was unrelated to the Kosovo issue. These two objections, say the polled editors-in-chief, were most often cited by perpetrators of attacks on media outlets. Forty-two per cent of those surveyed mentioned allegedly politically biased reporting as a reason for their attacks, while 23% specified unpatriotic editorial policy.

Prevention from gathering information about participants in the events which were covered by reporters was cited by 17% of editors-in-chief, while as many editors-in-chief said that the attackers had alleged violations of their personal rights and interests as the reason for their attack. False, unprofessional or un- ethical reporting was the reason for violations of media freedoms, according to 15% of those surveyed.

While there are some differences in the various groups of media outlets clas- sified by relevant criteria, a politically biased editorial policy is the most often cited reason for an attack among the editors of all the media outlets. This is more prevalent among RTV broadcaster editors (60% as opposed to 43% of radio editors, 38% of TV editors, and 43% of print media editors) and editors Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

of local media (52%, as opposed to 42% of national media editors and 36% of regional media editors).

question: reasons for attacks on media unrelated to kosovo issue?

Protective measures against media freedom and rights violations

Answers by editors-in-chief showed that they responded passively to viola- tions of their media freedoms and rights. Most (25%) undertook no action in relation to the attacks, threats or pressures to which they were exposed in the course of 2008, irrespective of the motives for the attacks. The most frequent reaction was to inform their audiences about the incidents (24%).

As regards more proactive responses to incidents, most editors-in-chief chose to inform professional organisations and associations, mostly domestic ones, but at times, international organisations and associations (12%) as well. Eight per cent of the media outlets relied on their own devices and resources to improve collective and personal safety, while 3% of editors-in-chief turned to the authorities for protection. Another 7% reported the incidents to the police. Only 3% brought charges against (unknown or known) perpetrators.  100 | 101

question: what measures were undertaken to protect media freedom?

Illustrations of the passive nature of the reaction of the media even to the gravest forms of violations of professional freedoms and rights come in state- ments given by journalists who were subjected to physical assaults over their reporting on Kosovo issues. According to them, the media outlets for which they worked mostly limited their reactions to publishing reports of the inci- dents. The exceptions are BETA news agency, Blic daily, and RTV B92.

17 February 2008, Belgrade – Attack of protesters on Studio B journalist crew

“The attackers have not been identified and no legal action was taken against them. Studio B gave considerable publicity to this incident”. 206

17 February 2008, Belgrade – Attack of protesters on Večernje novosti pho- tographer/reporter

“The way Večernje novosti treated me is praiseworthy – they showed concern and understanding for their employee and they helped in any way they could. They reported on the attack in the paper, and the attack was condemned. My attackers have not been identified, but, by pure

206 Excerpt from Marijana Mitrović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

chance, I was recently sent by Revija 92, which is published by the Novosti company, to take photos at a trial of one of the ‘heroes’ of the attack on the US embassy. He was bragging that the judge understood him, and that after a change of those in power, which he expected, he would be released immediately”. 207

17 February 2008, Belgrade – Attack by protesters on Radio Televizija Srbije crew

“The attackers have not been identified and no legal action was taken against them. RTS reported on the attack in its media. Although it is always clear what we do and what media outlet we belong to, every reporting assignment in the field during sports derbies, concerts in the open and rallies is risky. In the majority of cases, attacks are non-selective; they are targeting all journalist crews, regardless of the company they work for, and our positions are risky due both to the proximity of attackers and the small number of physical security guards of our camera positions”.208

17 February 2008, Belgrade – Attack by protesters on Studio B journalist crew

“The attackers have not been identified and no legal action was taken against the perpetrators. Studio B sent male reporters to all subsequent events where similar incidents might occur.”209

17 February 2008, Belgrade – Attack by a policeman on an Alo! newspaper journalist “The attackers have not been identified and no legal action was taken against the perpetrators. I and my paper did nothing else, except publishing an article about the attack”.210

207Excerpt from Milutin Labudović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

208Excerpt from RTS field crew’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

209Excerpt from Milana Mrkalj’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.

210 Excerpt from Bojan Radović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation.  102 | 103

BETA news agency’s editor-in-chief, Ivan Cvejić, and Blic’s editor-in-chief, Veselin Simonović, sent an open protest letter to the head of police directo- rate, Milorad Veljović, in relation to the police’s failure to provide protection to their correspondent from Leskovac, Milica Ivanović, at the Mutivode bor- der checkpoint, where she was physically and verbally assaulted by protesters. After this, the organisers of the army reservists’ protest at Mutivode check- point offered a public apology to the Leskovac-based journalist. Leskovac police department also apologised to the journalist for the behaviour of its officers, launched an investigation into the matter and offered to bring crimi- nal charges against the two policemen in question. She refused, “fearing the consequences”.

25 February 2008, Mutivode checkpoint – Attack by protesters on BETA news agency (and Blic daily) correspondent from Leskovac

“Following the public protest issued by the two media companies I work for, I received a public apology from the organisers of the protest. At the same time, Leskovac’s police chief carried out an internal investigation and apologised to me. I refused their proposal to bring criminal charges against the policemen, fearing the consequences. At the next big protest organised by army reservists in Leskovac, I enjoyed protection provided by the police chief himself. With his colleagues, he personally protected myself and my colleague from Večernje novosti during the protest from possible attacks either by reservists or the police. When a policemen swung his baton at my female colleague from Novosti, the police chief himself prevented the blow”. 211

Apart from the significant publicity given to the attacks on its employees and other media professionals in its own media platforms, RTV B92 informed both local and international professional organisations and associations about the incidents, as well as the police about the threats that this company’s editors and journalists had received, requested protection from the police, im- proved collective safety, and filed criminal charges against unknown persons who had threatened them.

211Excerpt from Milica Ivanović’s written statement. The report is filed in the OSCE Media Department documentation. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

Consequences of attacks on media

The majority of editors-in-chief claim that the pressures, threats and attacks to which they were exposed have not led to any changes in either their media outlets’ reporting or the behaviour of their journalists (65).

question: what changes to reporting have occurred after pressures have been exerted?

In some media outlets, however, according to editors-in-chief statements, changes that have occurred are contrary to what the perpetrators of the at- tacks wanted to achieve: 24 editors claim that their newsroom staff have be- come even more consistent in their coverage of the issues that were the cause of the attacks.

A slightly higher number of editors (33 in total) cite an opposite change in their media outlets’ reporting. Namely, seven editors say their organisations are now reporting to a lesser degree on contentious issues or on certain in- dividuals and organisations, while 26 have noticed a change in the behaviour of some journalists, be it that they now tend to avoid “sensitive” topics (13) or that there is a higher degree of self-censorship in their reporting (13).  104 | 105

D. MEDIA FREEDOM AND RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN 2007

Four out of ten editors-in-chief (39.5%), or 121 out of the total of 306, said that their media outlets were subjected to some form of violation of media freedoms and rights in 2007.

question: media freedom violations in ?

With respect to the type of media, according to the answers of those polled, violations of media freedoms occurred most often to print media, and the least – to radio broadcasters. These were cited by 67% of editors of daily news- paper, 65% of weekly editors and 58% periodical newspaper editors, as well as 26% of radio editors. Among RTV broadcaster editors, 46% said that they were exposed to violations of professional freedoms and rights, while 37% of TV editors claimed the same.

In 2007, the media freedoms of outlets with national coverage were more often violated (55%) than those of local (38%) and regional outlets (37%). Looking at the regions, attacks on media are cited more often than others by Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

editors from Šumadija and Pomoravlje (50%), southwest Serbia (47%) and eastern Serbia (46%), as opposed to northwest Serbia (23%) and South Serbia (29%), where the attacks were less common.

Forms of media freedom violations in 2007

Editors-in-chief said that they were exposed to numerous and various forms of violations of media freedoms and rights in 2007. Of a total of 121 editors (39.5% of those surveyed) who said that they experienced some form of vio- lation of their media freedom, 50 respondents (41%, or 16% of the sample) stated that they were subjected to political pressures; 35 editors (29%, or 11% of the entire sample) said that they received anonymous threats; and 30 edi- tors (25%, or 10% of the entire sample) claimed that they had experienced economic pressures at the hands of advertisers or other economic power- wielders.

Also numerous were accusations and instances of “name-calling” in other media outlets. These were cited by 38 editors (31%, or 12% of the entire sam- ple), while 24 editors said that charges were brought against their journalists (20%, i.e. 8% of the entire sample).

Other forms of violation of media freedoms and rights were less frequent. These included threats by organised groups (16 editors, i.e. 12% of those who experienced some form of attack), attacks on their offices or property (12 edi- tors, i.e. 10%), pressures exerted by media owners (12, or 10%), and physical assaults on employees (nine editors, or 7%).

Political pressure was applied most often to RTV broadcasters (29% of all RTV media editors), periodicals (21%) and TV stations (20%), as well as media outlets from South Serbia, Šumadija and Pomoravlje in central Serbia (21% each), and Vojvodina (20%).

Periodicals (16%), media with national coverage (15%), youngest media – those founded after the changes of 5 October 2000 (15%), media from eastern  106 | 107

Serbia and Kraljevo region (17% each), Belgrade and South Serbia (15% each) were exposed to anonymous threats more than others

question: what forms did violations of media freedoms and rights take in ?

Pressures by advertisers and economic power-wielders were reported more often than others by editors of periodicals (32%), editors of Belgrade-based media, daily newspapers, and media with broadest target audiences (25% each).

Legal actions against journalists were cited as attacks on professional freedom more often than others by editors of weeklies (28%), dailies (25%), and editors of media from Šumadija and Pomoravlje (21%).

Comparison of the state of media freedoms in 2007 and 2008

Editors-in-chief were asked to compare their experiences in 2007 and 2008 with regard to the incidence of media freedom violation cases. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

The question was answered by half of those surveyed (53%) since the other half claimed that they experienced no attacks in either 2007 or 2008. Of those who answered this question, 46% stated that the attacks on their media outlets were more frequent in 2007, while 18% said that they were more common in 2008 (7% added that the attacks occurred more often in the second part of the period under observation in 2008, i.e. after the declaration of Kosovo’s independence). One-third of respondents who were exposed to attacks were unable to clearly specify if there were more attacks in 2007 than in 2008, or vice-versa. Some said they did not know the answer to this question (22%). Of the remaining 14%, some editors said that their most difficult period had been before 2007, and a significant number alleged that pressures always in- creased during election campaigns, but did not choose between one of the two options.  108 | 109

VII | Brief overview of media legislation The media scene in Serbia is regulated by the Public Information Act212, Public Broadcasting Act213, Free Access to Information of Public Importance Act214, Advertising Act215, Telecommunications Act216 and Personal Data Protection Act.217 A working group with the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Serbia is drafting a law on the prevention of media concentration and ownership transparency.

PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT. This regulates the right to public information, which entails six different freedoms: 1. Freedom of expression, 2. Freedom to gather, investigate, publish and disseminate ideas, information and opin- ions, 3. Freedom to print and distribute (disseminate) newspapers and other media outlets, 4. Freedom to produce and broadcast radio and television pro-

212Public Information Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia Nō. 43./2003 and 61/2005), adopted on 23 April 2003; currently in effect – the version dated 26 July 2005.

213 Public Broadcast Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia Nō. 42/2002, 97/2004, 76/2005, 79/2005 – another law, 62/2006, 85/2006 and 86/2006 – corr.), adopted on 27 July 2002; currently in effect – the version dated 11 October 2006.

214 Free Access to Information of Public Importance Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No. 120/2004 and 54/2007), adopted on 13 November 2004; currently in effect – the version dated 13 June 2007.

215Advertising Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No. 79/2005), adopted on 24 September 2005.

216Telecommunications Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No. 44/2003 and 36/2006), adopted on 2 May 2003; currently in effect – the version dated 5 May 2006.

217Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No. 97/2008), adopted on 23 October 2008. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

grammes, 5. Freedom to receive ideas, information and opinions, and 6. the freedom to establish legal persons dealing with public information.218

This law stipulates, as one of its principles, that public information is free, in the interest of the public, and that it shall not be subjected to censorship.219 The law prohibits restrictions to the freedom of public information, and cites in particular: any form of physical or other pressure, the abuse of state or pri- vate authority, the abuse of the rights, influence or control of media printing and distribution means.220 To provide full protection, the law also stipulates the prohibition of any other actions apt to limit the free flow of ideas, infor- mation and opinions. 221

Politicians often condemn and exert pressure on media outlets concerning ar- ticles related to them. In this respect, it is important to point out that this law restricts the right to protection of privacy of a state or political office-holder if the information is of public relevance in view of the fact that such a person holds a public office.222

PUBLIC BROADCAST ACT. This stipulates, above all, the conditions and pro- cedures for conducting broadcasting activities.223 In addition, the law estab- lishes the Republican Broadcasting Agency and public broadcasting service institutions; stipulates the procedures for allocation of licences to broadcast radio and television programmes; and regulates other issues relevant to the public broadcasting sector.224 Public broadcasting service institutions are Ra- dio Television Serbia and Radio Television Vojvodina.

FREE ACCESS TO INFORMATION OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE ACT. This per- tains to the right of citizens to access to information of public importance

218 See above under 190, article 1.

219 Ibid.., article 2, paras. 1 and 2

220 Ibid.., article 2, paras. 3 and 4.

221 Ibid.., article 2, para. 3.

222 Ibid.., article 9, para. 1.

223 See above under 191, article 1.

224 Ibid.  110 | 111

that is in the possession of state organs.225 The law stipulates the formation of the institution of a Commissioner for Information of Public Importance who is to monitor state organs’ compliance with their obligations under this law.226 Discrimination against journalists and media outlets is prohibited, meaning that if several journalists have submitted the same request for information, the state organ in question must not give preferential treatment to any of the applicants by allowing only one or more applicants, as opposed to others, to enjoy the right to access to information.227 Journalists are not under obligation to cover the costs of copying and delivery of the requested document.228

ADVERTISING ACT. This regulates the conditions and procedures for adver- tising, the rights and obligations of advertisers, producers and transmitters of advertisements as well as recipients of advertisements.229 Transmitters of advertisements, according to the law, are a public media whose principal or additional contents consist of advertisements,230 but the law allows other le- gal entities or entrepreneurs displaying advertisements in public, as well as organisers of cultural, entertainment, sports or other public events transmit- ting advertising messages to the audience, to assume the role of transmitters of advertisements. 231 Time limits for advertising are set in such a manner that commercial TV broadcasters are entitled to utilise up to 20% of the total programming time for advertising purposes, i.e. up to 12 minutes per hour of the broadcast programming content, whereas public service broadcasters are entitled to half that amount, i.e. up to 10% of the total programming and up to six minutes per hour.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT. This regulates the conditions and procedures for conducting activities in the field of telecommunications and stipulates the

225 See above under 192, article 1, para. 1.

226 Ibid., article 1, para. 2 and article 35.

227 Ibid., article 7.

228 Ibid., article 17.

229 See above under 193, article 1

230 Ibid., article 2, para. 1, item 6.

231 Ibid., article 2, para. 1, item 7. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

formation of the Republican Telecommunications Agency.232 In addition, the law stipulates the powers and competencies for the regulation of relations in the field of telecommunications; the prevention of monopolistic conduct; the principles and procedures for allocation of operating licences; the tariffs for telecommunication services; the interconnection of telecommunication networks and operators; leased lines; the scope, content and improvement of universal services; rights and the obligations of telecommunication operators; radio communications; international telecommunications; and other issues of relevance to the functioning and development of telecommunications in Serbia. 233

PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION ACT. This regulates the conditions for the gathering and processing of personal data; the enjoyment and protection of the rights of persons whose personal data are gathered and processed; limita- tions on the protection of personal data; the procedure for the protection of personal data; the transfer of data out of the Republic of Serbia; and supervi- sion over compliance with the law.234 The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance is entrusted with personal data protection whereby the of- ficial title of the holder of this public office changes to “Commissioner for In- formation of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection”.235 The passage of this law was marked by considerable differences in opinions between the proposer of the draft law and the civil sector, the representatives of the fourth branch of power and international organisations. The bone of contention was the power bestowed on state organs to deny the commissioner the possibility to protect data if, according to the state organ in question, this was necessary on account of state and public security. This practically meant that the organ under supervision would have the power to decide if there was to be any su- pervision at all, and if so, to what degree. The proposer of the bill subsequently amended this provision, stipulating that the state organ in question would have to seek the opinion of the Court of Cassation presiding judge prior to such an action. The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and

232 See above under 194, article 1.

233 Ibid.

234 See above under 195, article 1, para. 1.

235 Ibid., article 1, para. 3.  112 | 113

Personal Data Protection estimated that this was a better solution, but added that it was also based on the idea that someone might suspend and restrict the powers of a supervisory body, i.e. the Commissioner himself.236 He went on to say that international standards prescribed full independence of supervisory organs as well as that such a provision existed in Serbia only, which was why, in his view, it was highly unlikely that Serbia would receive good marks for this piece of legislation on the part of European Union observers. 237

We should also mention the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia.238 This qualifies libel and slander as criminal offences. Prior to the latest changes to this law in 2005, these offences entailed prison sentences of up to three years. Following the enactment of the amended law, the depenalisation but not decriminalisation of libel and slander was implemented in Serbia. This means that prison sentences for these offences were abolished, but still quali- fied as criminal rather than civil offences, as is the case in most democratic countries. In relation to this, the position of the Office of the OSCE Repre- sentative on Freedom of the Media is well known: full decriminalisation of libel and insult is the best possible and is only solution that fully complies with 21st-century media freedom standards. Libel and insult disputes should be dealt with exclusively by the civil courts.

236Public statement by Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, dated 27 October 2008, see the web page: http://www.poverenik.org.yu/saopstenja.asp .

237 Ibid.

238Criminal Code (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No. 85/2005, 88/2005 – corr. and 107/2005 – corr.), adopted on 29 September 2005; came into effect on 1 January 2006. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008  114 | 115

VIII | Conclusions  The conditions for the full autonomy of the media and for the enjoyment of media freedoms and rights, i.e. the rights that media and journalists exercise in the name of general public, do not yet exist in Serbia. The me- dia system is characterised by a belated and incomplete transition, an ac- celerated pace of commercialisation in a cash-strapped and unregulated market, a drawn-out process of ownership transformation, weaknesses in legal regulations and law-enforcement institutions, the modest financial power of the media, a low level of professionalism and a large number of attacks on journalists. In a variety of ways, these all have an impact on the manner in which the media carries out its important social functions.

 According to available information, in 2008, there were 138 reported at- tacks on journalists in Serbia. Of this figure, 76 incidents were physical assaults on journalists and their property, while in 62 instances these were verbal attacks, pressures and various forms of thwarting a journalist’s ef- forts to carry out his/her assignment. Eight court rulings against jour- nalists were also recorded. Undoubtedly these figures pertaining to the number of attacks on journalists in the course of this year are not final. But these are the data which the OSCE managed to collect, using all available information that could be obtained.

 Out of 306 editors-in-chief participating in the survey, exactly half, i.e. 153 (50%) stated that their media outlets and journalists had been exposed to some sort of restriction to their media rights and freedoms during the course of 2008.

 Of the total number of those surveyed, 84.3% described the state of media rights and freedoms in Serbia in negative terms. Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

 According to editors-in-chief of Serbian media outlets, the main prob- lem concerning media freedom comes down, above all, to its enjoyment in practice rather than to legal and institutional guarantees of media freedoms and rights.

 43.9% of those polled are of the opinion that the laws regulating media sphere are good; 47.7% believe that the laws are inadequate, while the re- maining 3% did not express a view on this issue. Also, 58.9% hold the view that there are no adequate media institutions in the country, 38.9% believe that there are, while the remaining 2.2% did not answer this question.

 As regards the comparison in the field of media freedoms between Serbia and neighbouring countries, 53.1% are of the opinion that the state of me- dia freedoms is approximately the same, 17.4% believe that the situation in Serbia is worse than in other countries of the region, while 8.2% say the situation with media freedoms is better. Only 1% of those surveyed have not answered this question, whereas 20.3% have said that they are not in a position to compare the situation in Serbia with other countries as they lack the necessary information on the state of media freedoms elsewhere.

 Almost two-thirds of editors-in-chief hold the view that media freedoms mostly depend on general social context in which the media are operat- ing (transition phase which the society is undergoing, political relations, dominant values in the society, etc.). Of the factors in the media sphere that are seen by editors-in-chief as crucial, the following stand out: eco- nomic capacity of the media and professionalism of journalists.

 With respect to the sources of encroachment on media freedoms, editors- in-chief hold the view that the gravest violations come from the three fol- lowing sources: economic centres of power, state structures and political parties and organisations. Some editors-in-chief believe that criminal cir- cles, ideologically organised groups, deviant individuals and media them- selves are undermining media freedoms.

 As regards the violations of media rights and freedoms, editors-in-chief of Serbian media outlets believe that three forms of violations prevail over others: economic pressures (23.6%), attacks on journalists and threats (23%) and political pressures (20.9%). These are followed by concealment  116 | 117

and lack of access to information of public importance (11.4%); lack of professionalism on the part of journalists (7.9%); regulatory and judicial practice (5.3%); pressures exerted by the informal power-wielders (3.8%); owners’ behaviour (1.8%) and other (2.3%).

 According to editors-in-chief in Serbia, the most desirable measure to ad- vance media rights and freedoms would be to treat attacks on journalists in the same manner as attacks on on-duty public servants (52.3%). This is followed by: harsher punishments for perpetrators of attacks and threats (37.9%); more efficient court proceedings (33.3%); changes to the law qualifying libel and slander as criminal offences (30.4%); more effective police actions (29.7%); collective contracts (28.8%), and a higher degree of journalist professionalism, ethical conduct and self-criticism (27.5%). The answers provided by editors-in-chief show that least is expected from giving more publicity to instances of violations of media freedoms (14%) and activities of professional journalists’ associations (21%)

 According to Serbian editors-in-chief, the media were most often targeted in the first quarter of 2008 with allegedly politically biased editorial poli- cies (42%) and allegedly unpatriotic editorial policies (23%). Prevention of gathering information about participants in specific events was cited by 17% of editors-in-chief, while as many editors-in-chief say that the attack- ers alleged violations of their personal rights and interests as the reason for their attack. False, unprofessional or unethical reporting was the reason for violations of media freedoms according to 15% of those surveyed.

 Answers by editors-in-chief show that they responded passively to viola- tions of their media freedoms and rights. Most (25%) had not undertaken any action in relation to the attacks, threats or pressures to which they were exposed in the course of 2008, irrespective of the motives for the at- tacks. The most frequent reaction was to inform their audiences about the incidents (24%). As regards more proactive responses to incidents, most editors-in-chief chose to inform professional organisations and associa- tions, mostly domestic ones, and, at times, international organisations and associations as well (12%). Eight per cent of media outlets relied on their own devices and resources to improve collective and personal safety, while 3% of editors-in-chief had turned to the authorities for protection. Anoth- Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

er 7% reported the incidents to the police, while only 3% brought charges against the (unknown or known) perpetrators.

 The majority of editors-in-chief claim that the pressures, threats and at- tacks to which they have been exposed have not led to any changes in ei- ther the reporting of their media outlets or the behaviour of their journal- ists (65). In some media outlets, according to editors-in-chiefs’ statements, changes that have occurred have been contrary to what the perpetrators of the attacks wanted to achieve. That is, 24 editors claim their newsroom staff have become even more consistent in their coverage of the issues that were the cause of the attacks. A slightly higher number of editors (33 in total) cite an opposite change in their media outlets’ reporting. Namely, seven editors say their organisations are now reporting to a lesser degree on contentious issues or certain individuals and organisations, while 26 have noticed a change in the behaviour of some journalists, be it that they now tend to avoid “sensitive” topics (13) or that there is a higher degree of self-censorship in their reporting (13).  118 | 119

IX | Recommendations  Journalists who have been the victims of violations of media rights and freedoms in Serbia, as well as their media companies, should report each and every incident to the competent state organs, domestic and interna- tional journalist associations and international organisations. At the same time, in order to fulfil their mandates and meet their legal obligations, competent state organs must do everything in their power to investigate and prosecute cases concerning violations of media rights and freedoms, identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice. The murders of Dada Vujasinović, Slavko Ćuruvija and Milan Pantić, as well as the attempt on the life of Dejan Anastasijević, must be solved. As long as the perpetrators of these grave crimes are not brought to justice, Serbia will not enjoy an acceptable level of media freedom.

 The privatisation of media outlets in Serbia should be continued and com- pleted in its entirety. The media will be only relieved of interference and pressure on the part of political structures and economic centres of power to change their editorial policies if they are financially independent and not financed from the budget.

 In cooperation with international organisations and journalist associa- tions, the government of the Republic of Serbia should focus its expertise and funds in 2009 on strengthening the institutions monitoring the imple- mentation of media laws and journalists’ associations (NUNS and UNS). For their part, NUNS and UNS should bring the process of forming the Press Council to completion.

 The Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Serbia, as well as other minis- tries whose mandates may include the drafting of a media law or a piece of Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

legislation related to the media sphere, should bring the process of reform of media legislation to conclusion in 2009. This applies, above all, to the adoption of the Law on Media Concentration Prevention and Ownership Transparency, the Law on Electronic Media, amendments and addenda to the Broadcasting Law and the Law on Public Information, and others.

 In the meantime, the implementation of existing media laws should be improved. This relates to the Public Information Act, Free Access to Infor- mation Act, Public Broadcasting Act, Advertising Act, and Telecommuni- cations Act.

 To solve the problem of media rights and freedoms in Serbia in a systemic manner, a strategy for the advancement of media freedoms, which sets out clear guidelines regarding the directions for the activities of all competent institutions, should be drafted. Representatives of all competent ministries, journalists’ associations, non-governmental organisations, media industry, international organisations and independent media experts should take part in drafting the strategy.  120 | 121

X | Bibliography List of legal regulations, reports and web sites used as sources 1. Public Information Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia Nō 43/2003 and 61/2005), adopted on 23 April 2003; currently in effect – the version dated 26 July 2005 2. Public Broadcast Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia Nō. 42/2002, 97/2004, 76/2005, 79/2005 – another law, 62/2006, 85/2006 and 86/2006 – corr.), adopted on 27 July 2002; currently in effect – the version dated 11 October 2006 3. Free Access to Information of Public Importance Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No 120/2004 and 54/2007), adopted on 13 November 2004; currently in effect – the version dated 13 June 2007 4. Advertising Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, No 79/2005), adopted on 24 September 2005 5. Telecommunications Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No. 44/2003 and 36/2006), adopted on 2 May 2003; currently in effect – the version dated 5 May 2006 6. Personal Data Protection Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Ser- bia No. 97/2008), adopted on 23 October 2008 7. Criminal Code (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia No. 85/2005, 88/2005 – corr. and 107/2005 – corr.), adopted on 29 September 2005; came into effect on 1 January 2006 8. Strategic Marketing report Journalists and Journalism in the Eyes of Serbian Citizens and Journalists 9. Journalists’ Association of Serbia’s report on attacks and threats to journalists from the beginning of the year until August 2008 10. Centre for Free Elections and Democracy: www.cesid.org Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

11. Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia: www.nuns.org 12. B92 www.b92.net 13. Daily newspaper Danas www.danas.rs 14. News agency Vranje Press www.vranjepres.info 15. Association of Independent Electronic Media: www.anem.org.yu 16. Journalist Justin Vela: www.justinvela.com 17. Journalists’ Association of Serbia: www.unsonline.org 18. Net journalist: www.naslovi.net 19. Vesti: www.vesti.rs 20. Daily newspaper Press: www.pressonline.rs 21. Daily newspaper Blic: www.blic.rs 22. Subotica info: www.subotica.info 23. Daily newspaper Glas javnosti: www.glas-javnosti.rs 24. News agency TANJUG: www.tanjug.co.yu 25. Daily newspaper Večernje novosti: www.novosti.rs 26. Daily newspaper Kurir www.kurir-info.rs 27. Mefeedia www.mefeedia.com 28. Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina: www.ndnv.org 29. Radio Television Vojvodina: www.rtv.co.yu 30. Daily newspaper Građanski list: www.gradjanski.rs 31. Media Centre: www.mediacenter.org.yu 32. Daily newspaper Dnevnik: www.kikinda.cc 33. Commissioner for information of public importance: www.poverenik.org.yu 122 | 123 Media Freedom in Serbia in 2008

Odeljenje za medije

Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Beograd, 2009. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Izdavač: Organizacija za evropsku bezbednost i saradnju - Misija u Srbiji Odeljenje za medije april 2009. godine Beograd

Autori: Miroslav Janković Centar za politikološka istraživanja Instituta za društvene nauke (dr Dragomir Pantić. dr Jovanka Matić i mr Zoran Pavlović) Stavovi autora koji su izraženi u ovoj knjizi su njihovi lični i ne predstavljaju nužno i stavove Misije OEBS u Srbiji

Lektura i korektura Predrag Brebanović

Prevod Vladimir Brašanac

Dizajn korica Dušan Grubin

Priprema za štampu: COMMA | communications design, Beograd

Štampa: SGR Original, Beograd

Zahvaljujemo partnerima na saradnji Centar za politikološka istraživanja Instituta za društvene nauke

Tiraž: 300 primeraka

ISBN: Copyright© Organizacija za evropsku bezbednost i saradnju

www.osce.org/serbia  2|3

SADRŽAJ I SAŽETAK 5 II UVOD 9 III TABELA NAPADA NA NOVINARE TOKOM 2008. GODINE 11 IV PRETNJE SMRĆU VUKAŠINU OBRADOVIĆU 13 V PREGLED INCIDENATA 17 A. Fizički napadi na novinare i imovinu 17 B. Pretnje, verbalni napadi i pritisci na novinare 44 C. Sudske presude izrečene novinarima 67 VI MEDIJSKA PRAVA I SLOBODE U SRBIJI 71 - Metod istraživanja 72 - Uzorak 72 - Tehnike i tok istraživanja 75 A. Percepcija opšteg stanja medijskih prava i sloboda 77 - Opšta ocena stanja 77 - Ostvarivanje medijskih sloboda 78 - Zakonska regulativa 79 - Institucionalne garancije 80 - Poređenje sa susednim zemljama 81 B. Percepcija slobode medija i njenog ugrožavanja 82 - Od čega zavisi sloboda medija? 82 - Ko ugrožava slobodu medija? 84 - Oblici kršenja slobode medija 85 - Kako unaprediti slobodu medija? 86 Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

C. Kršenje medijskih sloboda i prava tokom 2008. godine 89 - Izveštavanje o Kosovu 89 - Izveštavanje o ostalim temama 92 - Mere zaštite 94 - Posledice napada 98 D. Kršenje medijskih sloboda i prava tokom 2007. godine 99 - Oblici 100 - Poređenje stanja slobode medija tokom 2007. i 2008. godine 101 VII KRATAK OSVRT NA MEDIJSKE ZAKONE 103 VIII ZAKLJUČCI 109 IX PREPORUKE 113 X BIBLIOGRAFIJA 115  4|5

I | Sažetak Rezultati istraživanja koje je Misija OEBS-a u Srbiji (u daljem tekstu: OEBS) tokom 2008. godine sprovela u saradnji sa Centrom za politikološka istraži- vanja i javno mnjenje Instituta društvenih nauka (u daljem tekstu: Institut) pokazuju da, iako je promena režima 2000. godine donela oslobođenje medij- ske sfere od potpune režimske kontrole i cenzure, u Srbiji još uvek ne postoje uslovi za potpunu autonomiju medija i ostvarivanje njihovih sloboda i prava. Medijski sistem Srbije karakterišu zakasnela i nedovršena tranzicija, ubrzana komercijalizacija (u uslovima siromašnog i neregulisanog tržišta), spora tran- sformacija vlasništva, slabosti zakonske regulative i institucija koje se brinu o primeni zakona, mala finansijska moć medija, nizak stepen obrazovanosti i profesionalizma, kao i veliki broj napada na novinare. Sve to utiče na način na koji mediji obavljaju svoju društvenu funkciju.

Osnovni cilj ovog istraživanja bio je da se utvrde realne dimenzije ugrožava- nja medijskih sloboda i prava u Srbiji, odnosno da se ispitaju raširenost, oblici, intenzitet i nosioci pretnji, pritisaka i napada na medije i novinare. Prilikom istraživanja se pod napadima na novinare i medije podrazumevao bilo koji oblik kršenja medijskih prava i sloboda uz upotrebu sile, pretnje ili pritiska, nezavisno od toga da li su oni bili motivisani konkretnim izveštavanjem ili samom činjenicom da se radi o novinarima i medijima.

Istraživanje je bilo podeljeno u dve faze.

Sa jedne strane, istraživači OEBS-a su tokom čitave godine pratili i dokumen- tovali slučajeve napada na novinare. Korišćena metodologija zasnivala se na terenskom istraživanju (tj. neposrednom kontaktu sa napadnutim novina- rima i prikupljanju izjava o incidentima), ali i na svakodnevnom praćenju medija i registrovanju napada. Rezultati ovog dela istraživanja pokazuju da su se, prema dostupnim informacijama, tokom 2008. godine u Srbiji dogodila 138 napada na novinare. Od tog broja, bilo je 76 fizičkih napada na novinare i njihovu imovinu, a 62 pretnje, verbalnih napada, pritisaka i raznih oblika Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

sprečavanja novinara da rade svoj posao. Takođe je registrovano i 8 sudskih presuda protiv novinara. Ovaj podatak nesumnjivo nije konačan: ne sme se zanemariti činjenica da postoje novinari koji nisu spremni da javno govore o napadima.

Drugu fazu istraživanja OEBS je sproveo u saradnji sa Institutom, čije je se- dište u Beogradu. Sprovedena je anketa – Institut ju je poslao na adrese 439 medija u Srbiji (97 novinskih, 205 radijskih i 137 televizijskih redakcija) – sa ciljem utvrđivanja percepcije razloga i posledica ugrožavanja medijskih slo- boda i prava, kao i mogućih budućih mera zaštite medijskih sloboda. Na an- ketu je odgovorilo 328 medija, pri čemu su 22 odgovora eliminisana, jer nisu ispunjavali kriterijume za uvrštavanje u uzorak. Konačan broj anketiranih je, dakle – 306.

Iako, prema istraživačkim podacima, 80% građana smatra da u Srbiji postoji kontrola ili cenzura medija, a to misli i čak 95% novinara,1 sloboda medi- ja danas nije ni u društvenom, ni u profesionalnom smislu aktuelno pitanje. Njome se bavi nekoliko institucija i profesionalnih udruženja, čija je aktivnost prevashodno usmerena na registrovanje slučajeva kršenja slobode medija i ublažavanje njihovih posledica. O medijskim slobodama se u javnosti govori tek prilikom obeležavanja godišnjica još uvek nerasvetljenih ubistava ili po- kušaja ubistava, kao i povodom Međunarodnog dana slobode medija. Nije- dan od domaćih subjekata se ne bavi sistematskim istraživanjem medijskih sloboda i prava, pa u Srbiji nisu dostupni podaci o stanju koje u ovoj oblasti vlada u dužem vremenskom periodu. Nedostatak relevantnih izvora svakako sprečava sistemsko bavljenje ovim problemima, a samim tim i unapređenje medijske sfere.

Kada se govori o slobodi medija u Srbiji i napadima na novinare, treba se seti- ti nerešenih ubistava Dade Vujasinović, Slavka Ćuruvije, Milana Pantića, kao i nerasvetljenog pokušaja ubistva Dejana Anastasijevića. Sve dok se počinioci ovih i drugih nerazjašnjenih zločina ne identifikuju i privedu pravdi, sloboda medija u Srbiji neće doseći zadovoljavajući nivo.

Tokom ovog istraživanja, pod medijskim slobodama i pravima podrazume- vani su: sloboda izražavanja mišljenja; sloboda prikupljanja, objavljivanja i ši-

1 Prema istraživanju Stratedžik Marketinga Novinari i novinarstvo u očima građana i novinara Srbije (2007).  6|7

renja informacija; sloboda protoka informacija i otvorenost medija za različi- ta mišljenja; sloboda uređivačke politike i nezavisnost medija; pravo pristupa informacijama; pravo kontrole i kritike vlasti i javnih institucija; kao i druga profesionalna prava novinara koja ne ugrožavaju prava i ugled drugih, opštu bezbednost i javni red.

OEBS se zahvaljuje svim saradnicima koji su doprineli nastanku ove publi- kacije, a pre svega istraživačkom timu Instituta, koji su činili naučni savetnik i upravnik Centra za politikološka istraživanja dr Dragomir Pantić, naučna saradnica dr Jovanka Matić i istraživač mr Zoran Pavlović. Posebno se zahva- ljujemo Zlatku Miniću i Anki Milošević, novinarima novinske agencije BETA i samostalnim istraživačima na ovom projektu. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine  8|9

II | Uvod Posmatrani period obeležilo je nekoliko važnih događaja. Izbori za predsed- nika Republike Srbije održani su 20. januara, odnosno 3. februara. U prvom krugu najviše glasova dobili su kandidat Srpske radikalne stranke Tomislav Nikolić (39,4%) i kandidat Demokratske stranke Boris Tadić (35,4%). Pošto nijedan kandidat nije osvojio više od polovine glasova, održan je drugi krug,2 u kojem je predsednik Republike, sa osvojenih 50,5% glasova, postao Boris Tadić, dok je Tomislav Nikolić dobio poverenje 47,9% birača.3

Dramatični događaji u nedelji proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova (17. februara 2008), a pre svega protesti koji su tim povodom upriličeni – i bili praćeni ra- znim oblicima nasilja, a posebno nasiljem prema novinarima kakvo u Srbiji odavno nije zabeleženo – aktuelizovali su (kako u stručnoj, tako i u najširoj javnosti) pitanje medijskih sloboda i prava. Ne samo da su novinari bili fi- zički napadani i izloženi različitim (otvorenim i anonimnim) pretnjama, već su čitave redakcije od strane raznih političkih organizacija i ideološki orga- nizovanih grupa optuživane za „izdajničko“ delovanje. Održani su i protesti pod nazivom „Kosovo je Srbija“, u čijoj su organizaciji sudelovale Demokra- ska stranka Srbije i Nova Srbija (koje su tada vršile vlast), te Srpska radikalna stranka i drugi.

Mesec maj protiče u znaku vanrednih parlamentarnih i lokalnih izbora.4 U novom sazivu Skupštine Republike Srbije, od 250 poslaničkih mesta, najviše mandata osvojila je koalicija za Evropsku Srbiju (okupljena oko Demokratske stranke) – 102, pa zatim: Srpska radikalna stranka – 78; koalicija Demokratske stranke Srbije i Nove Srbije – 30; Koalicija Socijalističe partije Srbije, Partije

2 „Predsednički izbori“, CeSID: http://www.cesid.org/rezultati/sr_jan_2008/index.jsp.

3 „Predsednički izbori – II krug“, CeSID: http://www.cesid.org/rezultati/sr_feb_2008/index.jsp.

4 Vidi http://www.cesid.org/rezultati/index.jsp. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

udruženih penzionera Srbije i Jedinstvene Srbije – 20; Liberalno-demokrat- ska partija – 13; Mađarska koalicija – 4; Bošnjačka lista za evropski Sandžak – 2; te Koalicija Albanaca Preševske doline – 1.5 Nakon nekoliko meseci, De- mokratska stranka i koalicija oko Socijalističke partije Srbije uspele su da, uz podršku stranaka nacionalnih manjina, prikupe dovoljan broj mandata za formiranje skupštinske većine, pa samim tim i nove Vlade Republike Srbije.

Savet za nacionalnu bezbednost Republike Srbije uhapsio je 21. jula haškog optuženika Radovana Karadžića i nakon nekoliko dana ga isporučio Među- narodnom krivičnom tribunalu u Hagu. Srpska radikalna stranka i Nova Sr- bija organizovale su 29. jula u centru Beograda proteste protiv tog hapšenja, koji su bili praćeni sukobima između demonstranata i policije. Tih dana su mnoge novinarske ekipe bile napadnute.

Pomenuti događaji su u velikoj meri, pa i presudno uticali na ostvarivanje me- dijskih prava i sloboda u Srbiji tokom 2008. godine. Analiza rezultata našeg istraživanja jasno pokazuje da je svaki od ovih događaja bio praćen velikim brojem napada na novinare, koji su bili daleko učestaliji tada, nego u meseci- ma kada sličnih događaja nije bilo.

5 „Vanredni parlamentrani izbori“, CeSID: http://www.cesid.org/rezultati/sr_maj_2008/index.jsp.  10 | 11

III | Tabela napada na novinare tokom 2008. godine Podaci koje je OEBS u saradnji sa svojim partnerima prikupio pokazuju da su novinari tokom 2008. godine pretrpeli ukupno 138 napada. Analiza infor- macija potvrdila je i da su napadi bili najintenzivniji u mesecima kada su se dešavali događaji od većeg društvenog značaja, poput predsedničkih izbora u februaru, parlamentarnih izbora u maju, proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova u februaru i hapšenja haškog optuženika Radovana Karadžića u julu. U febru- aru se dogodilo daleko najviše napada – 41, dok je najmanje napada zabele- ženo u septembru – 2.

Fizički i napadi na Pretnje, verbalni UKUPNO imovinu napadi i pritisci Januar 5 3 8 Februar 35 7 42 Mart 2 7 9 April 4 1 5 Maj 7 11 18 Jun 3 8 11 Jul 11 8 19 Avgust 3 3 6 Septembar - 2 2 Oktobar 2 5 7 Novembar 3 4 6 Decembar 1 3 4 UKUPNO 76 62 138 Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine  12 | 13

IV | Pretnje smrću Vukašinu Obradoviću Početkom novembra, vlasnik vranjskog nedeljnika Novine Vranjske, Vukašin Obradović, dobio je pretnje smrću. 6 Obradović, novinari koji rade u njego- vom listu, ali i poznavaoci lokalnih prilika tvrde da su te pretnje bile posledica serije tekstova koje je pisao o obračunima u vranjskom podzemlju i sprezi organizovanog kriminala i političkih centara moći. U pitanju je jedan od naj- uglednijih novinara Srbije i dobitnik više priznanja, među njima i prestižnih – „Jug Grizelj“, „Dušan Bogavac“ i „Stanislav-Staša Marinković“. 7

Problemi su za Obradovića i redakciju Novina Vranjskih počeli još 2003. godi- ne, kada je ovaj nedeljnik obelodanio aferu o vladici Srpske pravoslavne crkve Pahomiju, koji je nakon toga optužen za seksualno uznemiravanje maloletnih dečaka. Na adresu redakcije Novina Vranjskih tada je stiglo preteće pismo, koje je bilo potpisano od strane organizacija „Srpski oslobodilački otpor“ i „Srpski oslobodilački front“ i u kojem mu je poručeno: „Izgubićeš glavu zbog Albanaca. Znamo da si njihov plaćenik i da si dobio za redakciju stvari, kom- pjutere… Blatiš Pahomija i Srpsku pravoslavnu crkvu. Otkinućemo ti glavu, a porodicu ubiti ako ne povučeš tužbu i ne izviniš se ocu Pahomiju. Živiš u Srbiji, pseto izdajničko, ali platićeš nam ovo blaćenje pravoslavne crkve. Ti i tvoja porodica osuđeni ste na smrt.“ 8

6 „Učestale pretnje novinaru“, NUNS, 6. novembar 2008 (http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=9974).

7 „Obradović bez stalne zaštite“, B92, 6. novembar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=11&dd=06&nav_category=12&nav_ id=327495).

8 „Pisaćemo dalje o kriminalu u Vranju“, NUNS, 7. novembar 2008 (http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=9980). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Otkako ovaj nedeljnik postoji, prostorije u kojima se nalazi redakcija obijane su tri puta, a jednom su nepoznata lica polomila prozore na automobilu Vu- kašina Obradovića. 9 Ni u jednom od prethodno pomenutih napada i pretnji Obradoviću i redakciji počinioci nisu identifikovani.

U izjavi koju je dao predstavnicima OEBS-a, Obradović je naglasio da pret- nje i pritiske kojima je izložen u poslednje vreme shvata kao posledicu rada Novina Vranjskih i tekstova o kriminalnim strukturama u Vranju. Jedna po- litička partija je, nakon teksta u kojem Obradović povezuje njihovo političko delovanje sa aktivnostima vranjskog podzemlja, podnela protiv njega tužbu lokalnom sudu, tražeći višemilionsku odštetu. Ubrzo su Obradoviću, iz izvora bliskih podzemlju, počeli da stižu i saveti da bi trebalo da se „pripazi“, kao i te- lefonski pozivi u kojima su mu nepoznata lica pretila da će mu „polomiti noge ukoliko nastavi da piše o tim temama“. Obradović je kao najozbiljniju shvatio poruku koja mu je poslata preko njegove maloletne ćerke. Naime, početkom novembra, nepoznate osobe su presrele devojčicu koja se vraćala iz škole i rekli joj: „Roknuće ti tatu za 10 dana.“ Odmah pošto mu je ćerka prenela tu poruku, Obradović je o pretnjama obavestio Policijsku upravu u Vranju, gde su mu rekli da će sve biti provereno.

Prema Obradovićevim rečima, vranjska policija nije preduzela nikakve mere, sve dok Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije (u daljem tekstu: NUNS) nije zahtevalo od ministra unutrašnjih poslova da se Obradoviću, njegovoj poro- dici i redakciji Novina Vranjskih pruži zaštita. 10 Tek tada je policija pozvala Obradovića na informativni razgovor, koji je on kasnije opisao kao neforma- lan, tvrdeći da mu je policija ponudila obezbeđenje za stan i redakciju. Nagla- sio je i da u policiji nikada nije potpisao nikakvu izjavu, ali da je tada video ka- ko jedan od policajaca sedi po strani i beleži njegove reči. Policija nije nikada uzela ni izjavu od njegove ćerke. Tek pošto je Obradović čitav slučaj izneo u javnost, i pošto su o pretnjama izvestili najuticajniji mediji u Srbiji, Policijska uprava u Vranju ponudila je Obradoviću fizičko obezbeđenje, što je ovaj od- bio, jer se – kako je rekao predstavnicima OEBS-a – „ne bi se osećao prijatno, da šeta u društvu policije po svom gradu i gde ga svi dobro poznaju“.

9 Ovi podaci, kao i oni koji slede, preuzeti su iz izjave koju je Vukašin Obradović predstavnicima OEBS-a dao 18. novembra 2008 (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

10 „NUNS pozdravio policijsku zaštitu Obradoviću“, NUNS, 6. novembar 2008 (http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=9971).  14 | 15

Policijska uprava u Vranju se ipak oglasila povodom ovih dešavanja, saopštiv- ši da su preduzete sve potrebne mere u cilju zaštite lične bezbednosti Obra- dovića i njegove porodice, ali da mu stalno policijsko obezbeđenje nije dode- ljeno, jer „nije naveo nijedan konkretan oblik pretnji, pa ne postoje konkretni razlozi za to“. 11 Obradović, međutim, kaže da je policiji naveo sve konkretne pretnje koje je dobio, a u saopštenju koje je redakcija Novina Vranjskih odmah potom objavila kaže se: „[P]itamo se onda zašto je policija preduzela sve mere na zaštiti lične bezbednosti vlasnika Vranjskih i njegove porodice ako za to, kako piše u njihovom saopštenju, ne postoje konkretni dokazi“. 12 U jednoj od izjava za medije, Obradović je rekao da fizičko obezbeđenje nije ni tražio, ali da je sadržaj policijskog saopštenja indikativan jer izgleda „kao da daje pre- poruku zainteresovanima, u stilu, nemojte da dirate stan, nemojte redakciju, ali on nema obezbeđenje“. 13

Za obezbeđenje koje mu ju pruženo Obradović kaže da podrazumeva policij- sku patrolu koja samo noću obilazi njegov stan i redakciju, i da možda postoje neki nevidljivi policajci koji ga prate, ali da ih on ne vidi i da o tome ništa ne zna. Atmosfera u Obradovićevoj porodici se znatno promenila od kada su stigle poslednje pretnje, a osećaj nelagode, straha i tenzije dominira njihovim životima. Po njegovim rečima, to prvenstveno važi za njegovu ćerku, koja je veoma uplašena, stalno traži da razgovaraju i zapitkuje ga da li stvarno mora da piše o temama koje su razlog pretnji.

11 „Obradović: Potpuno nelogično objašnjenje“, Danas, 6. novembar 2008 (http://www.danas.rs/vesti/hronika/dezurna/obradovic_potpuno_nelogicno_objasnjenje.47. html?news_id=144577).

12 „Vranje: Policija ignoriše pretnje“, NUNS, 9. novembar 2008 (http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=9985).

13 „Pretnje Obradovićevoj kćerki: ‘Roknuće ti tatu za deset dana’“, Agencija Vranje Press, 7. novembar 2008 (http://vranjepres.info/sh/1203/10/18722/?tpl=25). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine  16 | 17

V | Pregled incidenata

A. FIZIČKI NAPADI NA NOVINARE I IMOVINU

[ Januar ] 09. januar – Grupa od desetak nepoznatih lica napala je novinara TV Studio B, Predraga Sarapu, i predsedničkog kandidata Narodne seljačke stranke, Marijana Rističevića, dok su – nakon emisije Problem, u kojoj su učestvo- vali – sedeli u beogradskom kafiću „Irish Pub“, u ulici Kneza Miloša. Prema izjavi Rističevića, napadači su nasrnuli na njega, usled čega je pao sa stolice i udario glavom o pod. Ministarstvo unutrašnjih poslova Republike Srbije (u daljem tekstu: MUP RS) saopštilo je da su tuču izazvali Rističević i Sarapa, koji su bili u „vidno alkoholisanom stanju“. 14

14. januar – Nepoznata osoba napala je novinara magazina REZ, Ivana Proda- novića, dok je u beogradskom naselju Konjarnik (u poslovno-tržnom cen- tru u Ustaničkoj ulici br. 189) prikupljao informacije za tekst koji je pisao. Prodanović je o incidentu dao sledeću izjavu: „Napadnut sam na poslu! To veče sam išao kod prijatelja, bivšeg policajca, u njegovu firmu koja se bavi poslovima fizičko-tehničkog obezbeđenja, da bismo radili na jednom slu- čaju. Hteo sam da pišem o ratnim vojnim invalidima, pa smo moj prijatelj i ja razgovarali na tu temu. Kada smo izlazili iz poslovnog centra, bio sam nekoliko metara ispred njega. U jednom trenutku me je neko napao s leđa i rekao ’Za rez, rez pod grlo’, pomenuo je crkvu, ne sećam se u kom kontekstu,

14 „Napadnuti Rističević i Sarapa“, B92, 10. januar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=01&dd=10&nav_ category=418&nav_id=279858). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

udario me pesnicom u glavu, tačnije u arkadu, i tada sam pao. Moj prijatelj je pojurio za njim i gurnuo ga nekoliko metara napred, ali kad je napadač pao prijatelj se vratio po mene da mi pomogne da ustanem, a napadač je u međuvremenu nestao. Posle smo otišli u stanicu policije da dam izjavu.“ 15

17. januar – Trojica nepoznatih napadača pretukli su na železničkoj stanici u Novom Sadu televizijskog novinara i pisca Đulu Mirnića. Napad se dogodio dok je Mirnić čekao autobus za Bačku Topolu i putem mobilnog telefona na mađarskom jeziku diktirao vesti svojoj redakciji. Mirnić je za list Magyar So izjavio sledeće: „Prišao mi je jedan mladić smejući se, a kada sam ga pogledao neko me je sa strane udario sa kantom za smeće. Pokušao sam da bežim, ali su me srušili i minutima šutirali poput dželata. Na kraju su me pitali na srpskom jeziku gde mi je tašna. U njoj je bila knjiga i novčanik s hiljadu do dve hiljade dinara. Međutim, nisu mi uzeli vredan mobilni telefon i sat. Primio sam bez- broj udaraca, naročito po glavi. Imam jedan ozbiljniji spoljni ožiljak, jedan udarac mi je povredio čelo, a zadobio sam i najmanje četiri čvoruge. Takođe, jako me bole rebra, oko i glava.“ Nakon incidenta Mirnić je zamolio službeni- cu na šalteru za informacije da pozove policiju. Pošto se ni dvadesetak minuta nakon toga policija nije pojavila, Mirnić je sam otišao u policijsku stanicu, gde su ga saslušali i poslali dva policajca na mesto napada. 16

18. januar – Džastin Vela, 17 fotoreporter koji je pratio predsedničke izbore u Srbiji za američku agenciju World Picture News, napadnut je u jednom be- ogradskom baru, u ulici Knjeginje Zorke. Napala su ga trojica ili četvorica nepoznatih mladića, starih oko 20 godina, dok je sedeo sa kolegama iz Veli- ke Britanije i Rusije. Vela je ukratko opisao incident: „Stajali smo, pili pivo i smejali se. U jednom momentu, samo sam osetio udarac, od kojeg sam pao na pod. Dok sam ležao, oni su me udarali, sve dok se nisu umešali ostali posetioci bara i razdvojili ih od mene.“ 18

15 „Pesnica zbog teksta o invalidima“, ANEM, 19. januar 2008. godine, (http://www.anem.org.yu/cms/item/medscena/sr/Vesti.html?articleId=9545&type=vest&view=view)

16 „Pljačka ili naručeni zločin”, Danas, 25. januar 2008, str. 33.

17 Za podatke o njemu i njegovom radu, vidi: www.justinvela.com.

18 Vidi „Izveštaj UNS-a o napadima i pretnjama novinarima od početka godine do avgusta 2008“, dostupan na veb stranici http://www.unsonline.org/index.php/IZVE%C5%A0TAJ-UNS-a- O-NAPADIMA-I-PRETNjAMA-NOVINARIMA-OD-PO%C4%8CETKA-GODINE-DO-1.- AVGUSTA-2008.html.  18 | 19

23. januar – Novinar i snimatelj Regionalne televizije iz Novog Pazara – Me- din Halilović i Aladin Dazdarević – fizički su napadnuti tokom snimanja protestnog skupa na trgu između zgrade opštine Novi Pazar i hotela Vr- bak, gde se održavala svečana sednica novopazarske skupštine povodom dobijanja statusa grada. Policija je uspela da zaštiti novinare od težih po- sledica, nakon čega je u njihovom pravcu bačena kamenica. 19

[ Februar ] 17. februar – Nakon proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova, na beogradskim Te- razijama je došlo do sukoba između policije i demonstranata, u kojem su demonstranti koristili kamenje, baklje i betonske kocke. Razbijen je izlog restorana „McDonalds“, u koji je ubačen i molotovljev koktel. 20 Demon- stranti su tom prilikom pretukli novinara agencije FONET Ognjena Ste- vanovića, koji je od udaraca zadobio više otoka i modrica po glavi i telu. Stevanovića je grupa huligana presrela, udarila i srušila na trotoar, a zatim su ga šutirali. 21

17. februar – Ekipa televizije Studio B napadnuta je na beogradskom Trgu Republike, dok je izveštavala o reakcijama građana na proglašenje nezavi- snosti Kosova. Novinarka Mirjana Mitrović, koja je izveštavala sa lica me- sta, opisala je incident: „Odmah po direktnom uključenju u vesti Studija B u 19 časova, na snimatelja, asistenta, kolege iz tehnike i mene, iz čista mira nasrnula je grupa mladih i agresivnih ljudi, koju je u tom trenutku policija potisnula od slovenačke ambasade. Mi smo bili jedina televizijska ekipa na tom mestu i bilo im je stavljeno do znanja da smo sa Studija B. Maltretirali su nas pre svega verbalno, a potom su kolegu i fizički napali. Nazivali su nas različitim pogrdnim imenima, izdajnicima, plaćenicima i uništili su nam deo opreme.“ 22

19 „UNS osuđuje napad na novinara i snimatelja“, Press, 18. februar 2008 (http://www.naslovi.net/2008-01-24/press/uns-osudjuje-napad-na-novinara-i-snimatelja/554100).

20 „Incidenti, tuče i suzavac na ulicama Beograda”, Blic, 17. februar 2008 (http://www.blic.co.yu/politika.php?id=30816).

21 Iz pisane izjave Ognjena Stevanovića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a)

22 Iz pisane izjave Mirjane Mitrović (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

17. februar – Tokom protesta u Beogradu nepoznata lica polupala su izloge na „B92-šopu“, u Makedonskoj ulici. Veran Matić, direktor i glavni i odgo- vorni urednik RTV B92, izjavio je da će i pored ovog incidenta, B92 kao medijska kuća raditi ono što i inače radi – izveštavati o stvarima o kojima javnost ima pravo i interes da zna, i da od toga neće odstupati. 23

17. februar – Ispred američke ambasade u Beogradu napadnuta je ekipa tele- vizije Studio B, dok je izveštavala o neredima. Novinarka i reporterka Mi- lana Mrkalj dala je tim povodom sledeću izjavu: „U mojoj ekipi su, pored mene, bili i snimatelj i asistent. Demonstracije su prvo proticale mirno, ali posle nekoliko sati boravka ispred ambasade, demonstranti su postali agresivniji. Prvo su počeli verbalno da nam prete, a zatim su i fizički napa- li snimatelja. Od prvog napada nas je odbranila žandarmerija. Međutim, kada je grupa od desetak momaka nasrnula na nas drugi put, morali smo da pobegnemo u privatni stan. Pre toga su par puta udarili snimatelja i asistenta, a mene lično je zaštitio čovek u čijem smo stanu kasnije boravili. Sem moje ekipe i mene, te večeri demonstranti su napadali svakoga ko je imao kameru, bez obzira koji je znak imao na opremi.“ 24

17. februar – Novinarska ekipa B92 napadnuta je prilikom izveštavanja sa demonstracija u Beogradu. Nikola Radišić, novinar koji je prisustvovao napadu, opisao je incident: „Tokom protesta povodom proglašenja ne- zavisnosti Kosova, 17. februara 2008. godine, izveštavao sam sa nereda u gradu. Trebalo je da se uključim uživo u vesti u 16 časova. Neposredno pre toga naišla je kolona huligana koja je potrčala ka ekipi B92 sa kojom je bila i jedna hrvatska novinarka i gađala nas kamenjem, psovala... Uspeli smo da izbegnemo kamenice koje su bačene ka nama, ali je jedna pogodila ka- meru. Kamera je minimalno oštećena. Nešto kasnije, dok sam izveštavao sa ulica, nalazili smo se na Terazijama, gde je došlo do sukoba između po- licije i demonstranata. Tom prilikom nekoliko ljudi je psovalo novinare, pa i nas, a poletela je i jedna kamenica, koja je pala pored nas. U tom trenutku bačen je suzavac, pa smo se nagutali istog i bili prisiljeni da odemo.“ 25

23 „Učestali pozivi na linč zbog drugačijih stavova“, Blic, 22. februar 2008. godine (http://www.blic.rs/politika.php?id=31419)

24 Iz pisane izjave Milane Mrkalj (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

25 Iz pisane izjave Nikole Radišića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).  20 | 21

17. februar – Mnogi beogradski mediji preneli su informaciju da su tokom demonstracija napadnute još dve novinarske ekipe: ekipa televizije Palma plus i ekipa hrvatskog RTL-a. 26

17. februar – Portugalski novinar Andre Kunja napadnut je u neposrednoj blizini Hrama Svetog Save u Beogradu. U tekstu koji je Kunja nakon po- vratka u Portugal napisao za tamošnji dnevni list Diario de noticias, napad je opisan na sledeći način: „I dok su sveće gorele ispred Hrama Svetog Save masa od nekoliko stotina hiljada ljudi nastavila je mirno da poručuje ’Kosovo je srce Srbije’. Da li je neko prebrojao te sveće? Ja sam to želeo, ali nisam mogao da odem do Hrama, jer me je kod ambasade Sjedinjenih Američkih Država napao mladi huligan. Drogiran ili pijan, bio je u masi koja je napala ambasadu. Udario me je drvenom palicom dva puta po ša- ci, zatim po leđima i još jednom u nadlakticu. Mikrofon TSF-a pao je na zemlju. Pre toga isti huligan je polupao staklo na obližnjem automobilu. Pola lica mu je bilo prekriveno. Samo se sećam njegovih očiju koje su kip- tele od besa. Na svu sreću, policija je u tom trenutku počela akciju i on je pobegao.“ 27

17. februar – Tokom nereda ispred ambasade SAD, demonstranti su napali snimateljsku ekipu TV Foks, koju su spasili ruski novinari koji su se zatekli na licu mesta. Grupa napadača krenula je na novinare, ali su novinari iz Rusije povikali da ih ostave na miru jer su to njihove kolege iz Rusije. Nig- de u blizini nije bilo policije. 28

17. februar – Fotoreporter dnevnog lista Večernje novosti, Milutin Labudović, pretučen je ispred američke ambasade u Beogradu, dok je izveštavao o ne- redima koji su se dogodili po proglašenju nezavisnosti Kosova. Labudović je rekao: „Samo što sam krenuo sa fotografisanjem, huligani su počeli da napadaju policiju i novinare kao besni psi. Kada su videli da držim foto- aparat, počeli su da viču da se prebijem, što su svi zdušno prihvatili, a ja sam počeo da bežim. Međutim nisam imao gde. Počeli su da me udaraju svim i svačim. Ja sam gledao da bežim prema kordonu policije, misleći

26 „Huligani napadali i novinare“, Politika, 18. februar 2008. godine, strana A8

27 Andre, Kunja, „Krv, plamen, suze i Vito”, Politika, 25. februar 2008, str. A9, autor Andre Kunja.

28 Iz pisane izjave novinara FONET-a (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a) Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

da ću tamo imati zaštitu, što je bila greška, jer su nastavili da me tuku na metar ispred četrdesetak policajaca koji su mirno stajali i gledali. Tada mi je jedan od demonstranata kamenom razbio glavu. U tom trenutku sam na samoj granici svesti pao ispred policije, ustao i tražio pomoć od njih, pružajući ruku jednom od policajaca. Policajci mi ni tada nisu pomogli, što mi i danas budi gorčinu, više nego povrede od huligana. Pritom svaki od policajaca je jasno video da sam na novinarskom zadatku i da sam fotoreporter zbog fotoaparata koji sam imao.“29 Posledice napada su bile veoma teške, jer su Labudoviću polomljeni zubi i deo vilične kosti.

21. februar – Na internet-sajtu YouTube pojavio se video-zapis koji prika- zuje pucanje iz snajpera u Mašu Mileusnić i Mišu Stoiljkovića – voditelje informativnog programa TV B92. Video počinje dramatičnom muzikom praćenom prikazom olujnog neba. Na ekranu se zatim pojavljuje poruka: „Tamni oblaci su se nadvili nad Srbijom! Postoji samo jedan razlog za to.“ Sledeća slika prikazuje pucanj iz snajpera u znak B92, a zatim i u dvoje voditelja,30 dok se krvava mrlja razliva preko njihovih lica. 31 Autor snimka, potpisan kao „WerGoNy“, naveo je ispod snimka da nije kukavica „jer je bio u ratu da brani Srbiju“: „Nisam huškač jer ne teram nikoga to da ura- di! Ovo je samo umetnički prikaz moga mišljenja, nešto kao slika Adema Jašarija u centru Beograda.“32 Snimak je nakratko uklonjen sa pomenutog sajta, ali se ponovo pojavio 1. marta, da bi 6. marta bio ponovo sklonjen.

17. februar – Policija je pretukla novinara dnevnog lista Alo!, Bojana Rado- vića, dok je u Makedonskoj ulici u Beogradu obavljao reporterski zadatak koji se ticao rušilačkog pohoda huligana od američke ambasade do centra grada. Radović je incident opisao na sledeći način: „U jednom momentu, iako je u sukobu sa demonstrantima učestvovala Žandarmerija, iz pravca Trga Republike pojavila se interventna brigada koja je pod punom opre- mom za razbijanje demonstracija počela da uz divljačke krike mlati sve

29 Iz pisane izjave Milutina Labudovića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

30 „Pismo Komiteta za zaštitu novinara zbog napada na medijsku kuću B92”, NUNS (http://www.nuns.org.yu/vesti/view.jsp?articleId=8963).

31 „Učestali pozivi na linč zbog drugačijih stavova”, Blic, 22. februar 2008 (http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Ucestali-pozivi-na-linc-zbog-drugacijih-stavova.html).

32 „Pucanj u B92”, Alo!, 22. februar 2008, str. 2.  22 | 23

koji su se našli u Makedonskoj ulici. Iako sam više puta uzviknuo da sam novinar i visoko podigao svoju novinarsku legitimaciju, to nije sprečilo dvojicu policajaca da nasrnu na mene i počnu da me tuku. Posle više uda- raca palicom po telu, oborili su me na trotoar gde sam ležao nekoliko mi- nuta. Nakon toga, policija je pustila sve koji su poput mene ležali na asfaltu sa jasnom namerom da nikoga ne privede. Kada sam istim pripadnicima policije objasnio ponovo, ali ovoga puta bez njihove pretnje batinama, da sam novinar, jedan od njih mi je rekao ’Jebi ga’. Kasnijim lekarskim pregle- dom, Radoviću je ustanovljeno naprsnuće rebra i brojni hematomi. 33

17. februar – Demonstranti su, nedaleko od albanske ambasade u Beogradu, napali izveštačku ekipu TV B92 i tom prilikom oštetili službeno vozilo. Ja- ke policijske snage sprečile su da se ambasadi na Dedinju približi nekoliko stotina demonstranata, koji su na njih bacali kamenice i flaše.34 Revoltirani što su zaustavljeni u napadu, oni su svoj bes iskalili na ekipi TV B92, koju su gađali flašama i kamenjem. Oštećeno je vozilo terenske ekipe, ali snima- telji i novinari nisu povređeni. 35

18. februar – Toga dana jedinica policije pratila je grupu demonstranata ko- ja se kretala iz pravca Nemanjine ulice u Beogradu, da bi posle izlaska iz terazijskog tunela počela da batina prolaznike i ljude koji su stajali na autobuskoj stanici. Među njima se zatekao i novinar dnevnog lista Pravda, Željko Segić, koji je policajcu pokušao da pokaže novinarsku legitimaciju, u čemu nije uspeo, pošto je dobio udarac pesnicom u glavu, usled čega je pao. 36

18. februar – Snimatelj i novinar TV Panonija pokušali su da snime odla- zak fudbalskih navijača i drugih organizovanih grupa iz Novog Sada za Beograd, na protest protiv proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova. Navijači su ih prvo napali verbalno i nisu im dozvolili snimanje, a zatim su ih gađali

33 Iz pisane izjave Bojana Radovića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

34 „Sukobi huligana sa policijom”, B92, 18. februar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=18&nav_id=285256&nav_ category=640).

35 Iz pisane izjave Nikole Radišića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

36 “Pesnica za novinara Pravde”, Pravda, 19. februar 2008. godine, strana 3 Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

flašama i zapretili barjakom, posle čega su snimatelj i novinar pobegli sa mesta događaja.37

18. februar – Nekoliko stotina subotičkih srednjoškolaca i fudbalskih navijača protestovalo je u centru grada povodom proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova. Oni su razbili izlog restorana „McDonalds“ i četiri pekare čiji su vlasnici Albanci. Demonstranti su uzvikivali šovinističke parole protiv albanske, hrvatske i mađarske nacionalne zajednice. Sukoba sa policijom nije bilo. 38 U neredima je napadnut i fotograf Subotičkih novina, Dejan Malagurski. On je, kako je rekao, prišao čelnom delu grupe koja je protestovala i pitao da li sme da snimi protest. Mladići iz kolone su mu rekli da ne sme, pri čemu ga je jedan od njih odgurnuo. 39

19. februar – Oko 300 Užičana, uglavnom srednjoškolaca, protestovalo je u centru grada protiv proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova. Tom prilikom su razbijena stakla na dve strane banke i hrvatskom supermarketu „Idea“, a napadnuto je i sedište Liberalno-demokratske partije. Policija koja je obezbeđivala skup nije reagovala.40 Demonstranti su kamenicama gađali pripadnike policije, uzvikujući im „Idite na Kosovo“, a bacali su kamenje i na snimateljsku ekipu TV5. Niko od novinara nije povređen.41

19. februar – Prvog dana nakon proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova, u Nišu su organizovani mirni protesti. Demonstracije su ponovljene sutradan, a u njima je učestvovalo nekoliko stotina srednjoškolaca, fudbalskih navija- ča i drugih građana. Žandarmerija je sprečavala demonstrante da dođu

37 Iz pisane izjave urednika TV Panonija (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

38 „Novi neredi, MUP hapsi huligane”, B92, 18. februar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=18&nav_id=285380&nav_ category=640).

39 „UNS u Subotici reaguje na vest o paljenju Džamije”, Subotičke novine, 19. februar 2008 (http://www.subotica.info/press.php?tag_id=103).

40 „Neredi u gradovima Srbije”, B92, 19. februar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=19&nav_ category=640&nav_id=285477).

41 „Protesti širom Srbije”, RTS, 19. februar 2008 (http://www3.serbiancafe.com/lat/vesti/14/45348/protesti_sirom_srbije?action=shownews&id=1 4&topicid=45348).  24 | 25

do Tržnog centra „Merkator“, a ovi su ih gađali kamenicama, metalnim predmetima i zapaljenim bakljama.42 Tokom demonstracija u centru Niša, grupa demonstranata je nasrnula na snimatelja niške TV5 dok je snimao njihovo približavanje „Merkatoru“. Snimatelju su nanete lakše telesne po- vrede. 43

19. februar – Nekoliko hiljada demonstranata iz Leposavića i severnog de- la Kosovske Mitrovice okupili su se u Jarinju, na graničnom punktu ad- ministrativne linije Srbije sa Kosovom, između Leposavića i Raške. Pr- vo su kamenicama gađali pogranične službenike, a zatim zapalili objekte UNMIK-a, pogranične policije i carine, te nekoliko njihovih vozila.44 Dok je fotografisao dolazak demonstranata, novinara Glasa javnosti i Kurira Zorana Šaponjića napao je jedan od njih i pesnicom ga tri puta udario u glavu, načinivši mu velike hematome na potiljku.45 Prema njegovim reči- ma, uzaludno je bilo pokazivati novinarsku legitimaciju, a od besa, kako je rekao, „razularene mase“ – koja ga je i kamenovala – pokušao je da po- begne na obližnje brdo. „Na brdu su me pronašla dvojica maskiranih ljudi koji su mi nakratko oteli fotoaparat i pretili da ću se loše provesti, ako se njihova lica budu videla bilo gde u novinama“, rekao je Šaponjić.46

19. februar – Tokom nereda na graničnom punktu Jarinje demonstranti su napali i dopisnika Večernjih novosti iz Novog Pazara – Miroljuba Nići- forovića. Napadači su novinara stegnuli za vrat i pokušali da mu otmu fotoaparat. 47

42 „Niš: Policija dežurala cele noći”, Blic, 19. februar 2008 (http://www.blic.co.yu/politika.php?id=31007).

43 „Neredi u gradovima Srbije”, B92, 19. februar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=19&nav_id=285477&nav_ category=640).

44 „Granica u plamenu, UNMIK u bežaniji”, Glas javnosti, 19. februar 2008 (http://www.glas-javnosti.rs/clanak/glas-javnosti-20-02-2008/granica-u-plamenu-unmik-u- bezaniji?page=1).

45 „Samaradžić: legitimni postupci”, B92, 19. februar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=19&nav_id=285424&nav_ category=640).

46 „Napadnuti novinari na Jarinju”, 24 sata, 19. februar 2008 (http://www.24sata.info/10237).

47 Ibid. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

19. februar – Na graničnom punktu Jarinje, gotovo na istom mestu gde su se odigrali i ostali incidenti, fizički je napadnut novinar-snimatelj Televizije Republike Srpske, Vladimir Milaković. Zajedno sa njim, napadnut je i no- vinar Radija KiM. 48

19. februar – U neredima koji su se dogodili na graničnom punktu Jarinje, fizički je napadnut i novinar nemačke TV ARD, Zoran Orlandić, koga su demonstranti oborili i šutirali po glavi i telu. 49

19. februar – U istom incidentu fizički je napadnut i novinar Glasa Juga, Ivan Vučković. 50

19. februar – Na graničnom punktu Jarinje napadnut je i novinar TV Most, Miloš Savić.51

21. februar – Kamerman RTS-a, Vladan Bugarski, i njegov kolega Darko Vu- čević, radnik obezbeđenja u toj medijskoj kući, napadnuti su i povređeni kod Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije u Beogradu. 52

21. februar – Demonstranti su u blizini američke ambasade napali i pretukli dva ruska novinara – producenta ruske televizije Rusija danas, Andreja Fjodorova, i operatera njegove ekipe, Andreja Pavlova. Fjodorov je izjavio da su ga demonstranti jako udarili po glavi i da je snimatelj pretučen.53 Ruski satelitski informativni kanal Vesti 24 izvestio je da je napad na ruske novinare prestao kada su se legitimisali kao Rusi.54

48 „Novinari nadrljali“, Alo!, 20. februar 2008, str. 2

49 Vidi napomenu br. 45.

50 Ibid.

51 Ibid.

52 Iz pisane izjave urednika RTS-a (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

53 „Bilans jučerašnjih nereda“, B92, 22. februar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index. php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=22&nav_id=285931&nav_category=640).

54 Tanjug, 21. februar 2008 (www.tanjug.co.yu/Dogadjaji/Protest/default.aspx).  26 | 27

21. februar – Tokom snimanja demonstracija u blizini Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, kamerman RTS-a, Milan Ljubinković, napadnut je i gađan ra- znim predmetima. Preostali deo tv-ekipe je vređan.55

21. februar – Novinarska ekipa RTS-a, koja je snimala demonstracije kod be- ogradskog trga Slavija i izveštavala o njima, gađana je raznim predmetima i verbalno vređana. 56

21. februar – Demonstranti su napali novinarsku ekipu RTS-a koja je izve- štavala sa nereda na uglu ulica Kneza Miloša i Birčaninove u Beogradu u trenutku dok su pripremali uživo uključenje u emisiju. Novinarka Vesna Dragićević gurnuta je i oborena na trotoar. Vojislav Đurović, snimatelj, zadobio je nekoliko teških udaraca u glavu, rebra i noge dok se borio da sačuva stativ i kameru. Tonski snimatelj Darko Glišić je takođe oboren na trotoar, a Mile Ilić, rasvetljivač, oboren je i šutiran u glavu i telo. Kamera i stativ koje je novinarska ekipa koristila – uništeni su. 57

21. februar – Demonstranti su kod američke ambasade napali fotoreporte- ra holandskog dnevnog lista NRC Handelsblad, Dirka Jan Visera, i naneli mu teške povrede grudnog koša. Opisujući incident, novinar je rekao: „Bio sam ispred američke ambasade, fotografisao sam događaje. U jednom tre- nutku masa se okrenula ka meni, a ja sam bio sa još trojicom kolega. Oni su, čini mi se, uspeli da pobegnu, a ja sam počeo da trčim i izvinjavam se ljudima koji su me napadali. Jedan demonstrant, mladić, nastavio je da me prati i da viče na mene, drugi su to primetili i pridružili mu se. Odjednom su me okružili, počela je masovna histerija, udarali su me i šutirali sve vre- me. Na kraju, neki stariji građani su mi prišli i izvukli me, a u blizini su bila i ambulantna kola.“58 Holandski reporter je primljen na hirurško odeljenje Urgentnog centa sa tri slomljena rebra i povredama glave.59

55 Iz pisane izjave urednika RTS-a (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

56 Iz pisane izjave urednika RTS-a (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

57 Iz pisane izjave urednika RTS-a (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

58 „Bilans jučerašnjih nereda”, B92, 22. februar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index. php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=22&nav_id=285931&nav_category=640).

59 „Rušili Beograd”, Večernje novosti, 22. februar 2008 (http://www.novosti.rs/code/navigate.php?Id=1 4&status=jedna&vest=116586&datum=2008-02-21). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

21. februar – Fotoreportera beogradskog lista Alo!, Miloša Perića, policija je pretukla dok je pokušavao da snimi nerede na beogradskim ulicama. Prilikom fotografisanja povređenog policajca u Nemanjinoj ulici, drugi policajac mu je prišao, pitao ga „Šta tu ima da slikaš?“, a zatim ga udario kacigom u glavu, da bi ga potom tukao pendrekom. 60

21. februar – Kod Urgentnog centra u Beogradu, policija je napala novinara beogradskog lista Alo!, Nemanju Kostića, dok je pokušavao da fotografiše policijski kordon. Kostić je policajcima pokazivao novinarsku legitima- ciju, ali su oni i pored toga najpre hteli da mu otmu opremu za fotografi- sanje, da bi ga zatim udarali pendrekom po telu, sve dok im se nije oteo i pobegao.61

21. februar – Tokom demonstracija u Beogradu, jedan od demonstranata je prišao fotoreporteru leskovačkog nedeljnika Naša reč, Jovici Smiljkoviću, oteo mu fotoaparat, a zatim ga i polomio. U pitanju je bio jedini fotoaparat ove medijske kuće. 62

25. februar – Na administrativnom prelazu Mutivode (kod Medveđe), de- monstranti su – protestujući zbog jednostranog otcepljenja Kosova od Srbije – fizički i verbalno napali Milicu Ivanović, dopisnicu agencije BE- TA i dnevnog lista Blic. Jedan od demonstranata je novinarku pogodio panjem i pritom je nazvao izdajicom. Ivanovićeva je dala sledeću izjavu: „Panjem u nogu me je udario jedan mlađi učesnik protesta dok sam tele- fonom slala izveštaj redakciji BETE, a u rukama držala agendu na kojoj je velikim slovima pisalo Blic. Moj vrisak su čule i ostale kolege, ali niko nije priskočio u pomoć. Ceo slučaj, udarac u nogu i moju raspravu sa napada- čem, posmatralo je nekoliko policajaca. Jednom od njih sam se obratila za pomoć i zaštitu, ali je taj policajac odgovorio da ništa nije video, smejući mi se u lice. Potom sam zatražila pomoć komandira policije, ali mi je on odgovorio da se sklonim i stojim pored policajaca pa me niko neće dirati. Prethodno sam pitala napadača zašto me je udario, a on je na to kazao

60 Vidi izveštaj UNS-a o napadima i pretnjama novinarima od januara do avgusta 2008 (http://www.unsonline.org/index.php/IZVE%C5%A0TAJ-UNS-a-O-NAPADIMA-I- PRETNjAMA-NOVINARIMA-OD-PO%C4%8CETKA-GODINE-DO-1.-AVGUSTA-2008.html).

61 Ibid.

62 M. Ž. I., „Reporteru ‘Naše reči’ polomili fotoaparat“, Blic, 25. februar 2008, str. 2.  28 | 29

’Zato što si izdajnik’. Tokom rasprave sa njim, opkolilo me je još nekoliko demonstranata preteći, pa sam bila primorana da se sklonim i zatražim zaštitu policije, koju nisam dobila.“63 Sutradan su BETA, Blic i Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije uputili zajednički protest Ministarstvu unutraš- njih poslova Republike Srbije, zbog toga što novinarka nije dobila ade- kvatnu policijsku zaštitu.64

25. februar –Snimatelj i montažer RTV B92, Milan Sokolović, imao je zadatak da, neposredno po proglašenju nezavisnosti Kosova, prati proteste navi- jača i rezervista u Nišu, Medveđi, Leskovcu i na policijskom punktu Mu- tivode. Vršeći novinarsku dužnost, napadnut je dva puta. U izjavi o ovim događajima rekao je: „U Nišu sam na centralnom trgu i ispred TC „Mer- kator“ zamolio kolegu sa RTS-a, koji tog dana nije radio, da pođe sa mnom i da mi čuva leđa jer sam procenio da je skup visokog rizika za mene. Grupa navijača mi je prišla sa leđa i psujući mi majku plaćeničku, izdaj- ničku i ustašku, i krenula da me linčuje. Jedva sam sa kolegom uspeo da se izvučem i sakrijem u ulazu jedne okolne zgrade. U Nišu su me prepoznali da sam sa B92 dok na Mutivodi nisu znali ko zapravo radi za B92, jer im je samo ta televizija smetala. Pijanim rezervistima je kolega sa FONET-a rekao da radim za FONET, tako da sam nesmetano nastavio da snimam kako se deru ’Jebaćemo majku ovome što snima za B92’.“ Posledica ovih napada je da je Sokolović skinuo sve oznake RTV B92 sa kombija, kamere, mikrofona i drugih uređaja.65

28. februar – Nakon proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova, usledile su i pretnje smrću direktoru i glavnom uredniku RTV B92, Veranu Matiću, u kojima se on naziva nacionalnim izdajnikom. U prilogu na TV B92 prikazane su pretnje poslate elektronskom poštom sa fiktivnih adresa, sa tekstovima poput „Zaklaću te ustašo“, „Zar si još živ“ i „Dobićeš metak u glavu… ako nastaviš da degradiraš srpsku državu. Završićeš kao smrdljivi Đinđić, ne samo ti nego i mnogi koji stanu na put srpskom narodu“.66 U protestnom

63 Iz pisane izjave Milice Ivanović (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

64 Ibid.

65 Iz pisane izjave Milana Sokolovića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

66 „B92: Krivična prijava zbog pretnji“, B92, 25. februar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index. php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=25&nav_category=11&nav_id=286344). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

pismu Komiteta za zaštitu novinara – upućenom tim povodom državnom vrhu Srbije – navedene su i sledeće pretnje upućene Matiću: „Saznao sam gde živiš, tako da ću te uskoro ubiti“, „Gorite u paklu ako već nećete biti u vašoj televiziji kad je budu palili“. Prema saznanjima Komiteta, pretnje su se nastavile tokom februara i marta, a Veran Matić je u izjavi za Komitet rekao da mu je kretanje po gradu otežano, „jer se svakodnevno suočava sa verbalnim pretnjama i psovkama čim izađe na ulicu“.67

[ Mart ] 1. mart – U noći između 28. februara i 1. marta, bačena je bomba-kašika- ra na ulazna vrata beogradskog radija TDI, u ulici Maksima Gorkog br. 56. Direktorka ovog radija Ružica Krdžić, koja inače obavlja i funkciju predsednice Beogradske asocijacije radio-stanica, u izjavi za OEBS kaže: „Direktne pretnje dobila sam telefonom dva dana pre napada, od osobe koja je zvala sa skrivenog broja i koja je rekla: ’Ako želite rat, imaćete ga! Vi odlično znate ko smo mi i ko stoji iza nas!’ Znala sam da je ta preteća poruka stigla od ljudi iz radija koji je imao višegodišnji piratski staž i koji nam je godinama, radeći na divlje, smetao u emitovanju, zbog čega sam podnela 20 prijava RRA i RATEL. Imamo protiv njih i presudu Vrhovnog suda Srbije, i sve ove pretnje koje su, evo, kulminirale bacanjem bombe na naša vrata, poslednja su opomena da odustanemo da ih dalje sudski gonimo.“ Policija je izvršila uviđaj na licu mesta, ali do danas ne postoje zvanične informacije da li su osobe odgovorne za ovaj napad pronađene i privedene pravdi. 68

31. mart – Posle fudbalske utakmice u Čačku, između lokalnog „Borca“ i „Partizana“ iz Beograda, funkcioner beogradskog kluba Voja Radojević nasrnuo je na novinara Kurira Konstantina Radulovića, pokušavajući da se fizički obračuna sa njim.69

67 Ibid

68 Intervju sa Ružicom Krdžić, direktorkom Radija TDI, 3. mart 2008 (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

69 „Napadnut novinar Kurira“, Kurir, 31. mart 2008 (http://www.kurir-info.rs/clanak/kurir-31-03-2008/napadnut-novinar-kurira).  30 | 31

[ April ] 12. april – Novinari Radio-televizije Panonija iz Novog Sada, Milan Antoni- jević i Biljana Gavrić, napadnuti su na novosadskom Trgu slobode, dok su pokušavali da snime okršaj navijača fudbalskih klubova Partizan i Vojvo- dina. Huligani su pretukli Antonijevića i oteli mu i uništili kameru. Nešto kasnije, oštećena kamera mu je vraćena, ali bez snimljenog materijala. 70

23. april – Fotoreporter lista Blic, Jovan Jarić, napadnut je ispred ugostitelj- skog objekta „Kolašinka“, u novosadskom prigradskom naselju Veternik. Prema Jarićevoj izjavi, napali su ga vlasnici Kolašinke dok je pokušavao da fotografiše taj objekat, a nakon objavljene priče da su vlasnici osuđeni zbog trgovine ljudima. Napadači su mu oteli fotoaparat i polomili objek- tiv.71

27. april – U beogradskoj opštini Voždovac desio se incident između Alek- sandra Tijanića, direktora RTS-a i Roberta Tamaša, člana izbornog štaba Liberalno-demokratske partije. Tamaš je rekao da se na tom mestu našao sasvim slučajno i u društvu svoje supruge, kada je primetio Tijanića kako izlazi iz cvećare: „Namrštio sam se i on je primetio da sam imao grimasu koja nije bila prijatna prema njemu. Žena mi je kazala da uđem u kola a ja sam rekao: ’Ma ko ga jebe.’ On je čuo šta sam rekao i odgovorio: ’Jebali te Čeda i Beba’, a ja sam mu odgovorio istom merom. On je nasilnički kre- nuo prema meni i napao me i pretio mi.“ Direktor RTS-a tvrdi suprotno: „Krenuo sam na porodični ručak i prošao pored kola na kojima je bio naslonjen taj momak... Dobacio mi je da ću platiti za sve i da smo upro- pastili državu zbog Kosova. Odgovorio sam mu da sam stariji od njega 30 godina, a on je krenuo u kola što sam shvatio kao mogućnost da u njima ima oružije. Pritrčao sam i pokušao da ga zadržim u kolima zatvarajući mu vrata. On je počeo da me udara nogama na šta sam mu ja uzvratio.“ Prema rečima radnice cvećare u kojoj je Tijanić bio, do incidenta je došlo pošto je prvi Tamaš opsovao: „Nisam videla da li je bilo tuče, ali sam čula

70 S. Živković, „Obračun navijača noževima, dvoje novinara pretučeno”, Politika, 13. april 2008, str. A1.

71 „Osuda napada na fotoreportera Blica”, 24. april 2008 (http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Osuda-napada-na-fotoreportera-Blica.html). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

da je prvo čovek koji je sedeo u kolima opsovao direktora RTS-a, i da je na to onda ovaj uzvratio.“72

28. april – Predsednik Lige Socijaldemokrata Vojvodine, Nenad Čanak, pre- kinuo je intervju koji je sa njim vodila novinarka lista Dnevnik, Snežana Nikolić. On je uzeo diktafon sa stola, isključio ga i izvadio kasetu, koju je potom smrskao u ruci. Zatim je smrskanu kasetu bacio na pod, počeo da maše svojim štapom i isterao novinarku iz kuće. Novinarka Nikolić je po- vodom incidenta izjavila: „Pitanje koje sam predsedniku LSV-a postavila glasilo je: ’Gospodine Čanak, vi kažete, i u tome ste vrlo jasni, da su ovi iz- bori za Narodnu skupštinu referendum između Evrope i izolacije, i da je to razlog zbog kojeg ste se okupili oko liste Za evropsku Srbiju – Boris Tadić. Ali, nejasno je i postoji nedoumica u javnosti da li ste ulaskom u tu koali- ciju prihvatili i politiku DS-a prema Kosovu? Pitam vas to zato jer je Oli- ver Dulić u intervjuu našem listu rekao da ste onoga trenutka kad ste ušli u tu koaliciju prihvatili i politiku DS-a prema Kosovu, ali je to posle de- mantovala narodna poslanica LSV-a Aleksandra Jerkov.’ Posle kraćeg raz- govora, u kojem sam mu postavila i potpitanja u vezi s istom, kosovskom, temom – za koju smatram da je u izbornoj kampanji uoči izbora 11. maja i te kako važna i da za nju postoji interes javnosti – predsednik LSV-a me je neopravdano optužio da pokušavam da unesem razdor u okviru izborne liste Za evropsku Srbiju – Boris Tadić, kao i da ’su to metodi kojima se služi Vojislav Koštunica’. Kada je iz diktafona uzeo kasetu, bio je zamoljen da je vrati i da nastavimo intervju. On na to, međutim, nije bio spreman.“ Dan kasnije, Čanak je na konferenciji za novinare izjavio: „Izvinjavam se, bio sam malo loše volje i naravno velika mi je žal što se to dogodilo. Ali i dalje ne mislim da sam jako pogrešio. Da bi neko bio novinar, nije dovoljno da ima novinarsku legitimaciju, nego mora da ima i profesionalnu etiku. Kada ta etika zataji, onda se tu događaju i neprijatne situacije. Pošto smo došli u poziciju da intervju više nema smisla, nisam želeo da dozvolim da se pravi skandal tamo gde ga nema.“ 73

72 “Pesnice sevale ispred cvećare”, Večernje novisti, 27. april 2008. godine (http://www.novosti.rs/code/navigate.php?Id=9&status=jedna&vest=120368&datum=2008-04-28)

73 „Čanak isterao novinarku Dnevnika“, Blic, 29. april 2008. godine, (http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/ Canak-isterao-novinarku-Dnevnika.html)  32 | 33

[ Maj ] 04. maj – Na planini Goliji, nepoznata lica oštetila su transmisionu opremu Regionalne televizije i Radija 100+ iz Novog Pazara, tako što su isekli ka- blove i prekinuli signal, nakon čega je prestalo emitovanje programa. U izjavi koju je dao predstavnicima OEBS-a Medin Halilović, urednik Regi- onalne televizije, rekao je da se od 2004. godine desilo na desetine napa- da na novinare i imovinu te medijske kuće, kao i da odgovorna lica ni u jednom slučaju nisu pronađena. Dodao je i da se napadi obično dešavaju tokom izbornih kampanja.74 Urednik Radija 100+, Ishak Slezović, rekao je predstavnicima OEBS-a da je taj radio kolateralna šteta ovog napada, koji je po njegovom mišljenju bio usmeren na Regionalnu televiziju i čiji je povod bila izborna kampanja.75

04. maj – Na manifestaciji „Gulašijada“ u selu Dupljaja (pokraj Bele Crkve), vlasnika i glavnog urednika nezavisne RTV TNT iz Bele Crkve, Stefana Cvetkovića, napalo je dvadesetak ljudi. Cvetković je pokušao da snimi tu grupu kako provocira i psuje lidera Lige Socijaldemokrata Vojvodine, Ne- nada Čanka. Pošto su videli da ih snima, pojedinci iz te grupe su krenuli ka Cvetkoviću, pogodili flašom televizijsku kameru i nekoliko puta ga udarili. Ubrzo je stigla policija, a Cvetković tvrdi da su joj napadači rekli da su pristalice Srpske radikalne stranke. 76

06. maj – Oko 14.15 časova, napadnuto je dopisništvo Večernjih novosti u Nišu, na kojem je – velikim kamenom umotanim u žutu plastičnu kesu – razbijen izlog. U kesi se nalazila i poruka glavnom uredniku, u kojoj je pisalo „Smrt fašizmu, kurac komunizmu“. U potpisu je stajalo „Crna ruka“. U kesi je bio i flajer sa slikom žene sa šajkačom i natpisom „Šajkača srpski brend“. Radnica kompanije koja prima male oglase sedela je od- mah do izloga koji je razbijen, ali nije povređena u napadu.77 Već sutradan, policija je uhapsila Milorada Lazarevića iz Niša pod pretpostavkom da

74 Intrevju sa Medinom Halilovićem, 6. maj 2008 (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

75 Intrevju sa Ishakom Slezovićem, 6. maj 2008 (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

76 „Napadnut glavni urednik TNT televizije na Gulašijadi“, Danas, 5. maj 2008.

77 „Pretnja ‘Crne ruke’”, Večernje novosti, 7. maj 2008 (http://www.novosti.rs/code/navigate.php?Id=9&status=jedna&vest=120697&datum=2005-11-24). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

je odgovoran za ovaj napad, a sudija za prekršaje mu je izrekao novčanu kaznu u iznosu od 20.000 dinara.78

08. maj – Nepoznata lica su isekla strujni kabl u blizini predajnika RTV So- kobanja i prekinuli emitovanje programa dok je na televiziji, u zakuplje- nom terminu, gostovao predsednik opštine Miša Dinić. Vršilac dužnosti glavnog i odgovornog urednika ove televizije, Gordana Stamenković, tim povodom je u izjavi TANJUG-u rekla: „Krajem devedesetih godina našoj televiziji su skidali i plenili linkove, presecali kablove i pečatili prostorije, ali smo bili uvereni da su ta vremena iza nas. Slučaj je prijavljen policiji i istraga je u toku.“ 79

17. maj – Dopisnik dnevnog lista Gazeta iz Subotice slučajno se, kod mesta Vetrušić (na starom putu Subotica – Novi Sad), zatekao na mestu saobra- ćajne nesreće u kojoj su smrtno stradale dve osobe. Dok je pokušavao da fotografiše prizor, prišao mu je policajac i počeo da ga vređa i psuje, a zatim mu je oduzeo fotoaparat, ličnu kartu i novinarsku legitimaciju. Novinar je povodom incidenta izjavio: „Kasnije se vratio i zatražio da mu kažem kako da izbriše fotografije. U međuvremenu, prišao mi je i istražni sudija i verbal- no me napao, nazivajući me mumijom koja snima leševe. Onaj policajac koji mi je uzeo aparat počeo je da briše slike, čak i one koje nisu snimljene tu.“ Dodao je i da je u jednom trenutku među okupljenima prostrujala vest da je udes skrivio visoki funkcioner Vlade i „da su policija i istražni organi veoma nervozni, jer im je konce pomrsio jedan novinar“.80

19. maj – Pedesetak pristalica političke organizacije Radnički otpor iz Kra- gujevca pokušali su da nasilno upadnu u prostorije RTV Kragujevac, u če- mu ih je sprečila policija. Oni su insistirali da TV Kragujevac snimi izjavu njihovog lidera povodom navodne izborne krađe na pojedinim biračkim mestima u gradu. Mnoge organizacije i udruženja novinara su osudili ovaj incident.81 U saopštenju za javnost, NUNS je podsetio da je „uređivačka

78 D. K., „Kamenom na dopisništvo”, Press, 8. maj 2008, str. 16.

79 Vidi OEBS-ov izveštaj o incidentu, 9. maj 2008 (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

80 „VIP saobraćajka!“, Gazeta, 18. maj 2008, str. 11.

81 „Pokušaj upada u TV Kragujevac“, B92, 20. maj 2008 (https://xs4.b92.net/info/vesti/index. php?yyyy=2008&mm=05&dd=20&nav_id=299509&nav_category=418).  34 | 35

politika medijskih kuća u isključivoj ingerenciji uredničkih kolegijuma i da svaki pokušaj bilo kakvih uticaja sa strane predstavlja pritisak na medi- je i kršenje Ustavom i zakonom zagarantovanih medijskih sloboda“.82

30. maj – Novinar beogradskog Kurira, V. S., otputovao je u Novi Sad, gde je istraživao navodni ilegalni transport transformatora za JP „Elektromreža Srbije“, u svrhe kojeg je hrvatska firma „Zagreb trans“ angažovala kom- paniju „Eurošped“ iz Novog Sada. Direktor „Eurošpeda“ mu je, kako je izjavio V. S., prišao i rekao da nije zadovoljan tekstovima koje Kurir piše o ovom slučaju, a zatim ga gurnuo i zaleteo se da ga udari, ali se zaustavio.83

[ Jun ] 15. jun – Nepoznato lice je fizički napalo i povredilo Bojana Dakića, snima- telja Televizije Vojvodina, dok je na Ribarskom ostrvu u Novom Sadu sni- mao prilog vremenske prognoze. Dakić je deci koja su stajala pored njega rekao da se slobodno okupaju i da će moći da se vide na televiziji, posle čega mu je nepoznati muškarac prišao i rekao „da je na Kosovu ubijao Šiptare“, te „da nije došao u Novi Sad da bi neko provocirao njegovu decu“. Zatim ga je nekoliko puta udario u lice i telo zbog čega je morao da zatraži medicinsku pomoć. Dakić je nakon toga oko vrata nosio medicinsku kra- gnu, a imao je i otekline na vilici i rebrima.84

17. jun – Obezbeđenje poznatog muzičara Gorana Bregovića fizički je na- srnulo na novinarku dnevnog lista Kurir, koja je u Kliničkom centru u Beogradu pokušala da dođe do bolničkog apartmana u kojem se muzi- čar oporavljao od povrede. Jedan od Bregovićevih telohranitelja oduzeo je novinarki fotoaparat, uz pretnju da će je „baciti kroz prozor ako nastavi da se šunja i slika po bolnici“. Novinarka ovako opisuje incident: „Oko 13 časova ušli smo bez problema u zgradu u kojoj se nalazi Bregovićev bolnički apartman. Kad smo pokušali da otvorimo vrata bolničke sobe, koja do tog trenutka nije obezbeđivao niko, iza nas se stvorio naoružani čovek u crnoj majici i crnim pantalonama. Grubo me je zgrabio za ruku,

82 Saopštenje NUNS-a, 20. maj 2008 (http://www.nuns.org.yu/aktivnosti/view.jsp?articleId=9224).

83 E. K., „Napadnut novinar Kurira”, Kurir, 31. maj 2008, str. 3.

84 „Pretučen snimatelj RTV“, Dnevnik, 16. jun 2008, str. 8. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

izvukao me u hodnik i počeo da me ispituje ko sam i šta tražim ispred tih vrata. Saznavši da sam želela da posetim Bregovića, bukvalno mi je oteo fotoaparat, iz koga je izbrisao sve dotad napravljene fotografije, a potom je zagrmeo kao da je otkrio opasne teroriste: ’Ti nisi normalna! Mogu sada da bacim aparat i tebe kroz prozor. Da li uopšte znaš da je zabranjeno fo- tografisanje i šunjanje po bolnici?! Šta ti pokušavaš da uradiš?! Htela si da slikaš Bregovića, ma nemoj? Briši odavde i neću više da te vidim! U slučaju da se vratiš, neću biti ovako fin.’“85

18. jun – U crkvi Svete trojice u mestu Duškovci (okolina Kragujevca) desio se incident između vernika i sveštenstva, pri čemu je novinar Dečije televizije – koji je snimao događaj – fizički napadnut. Osnivač pomenute televizije, Miodrag Gavrić – koji je prisustvovao incidentu – rekao je: „Usred crkve, sveštenik Dmitar nasrnuo je na snimatelja Dečje televizije iz Kragujevca koji je bio vidno obeležen, povukao ga i gurnuo prema zidu“. 86

[ Jul ] 13. jul – Na gradskom bazenu u Zaječaru dogodilo se ubistvo, usled čega se nekoliko televizijskih ekipa pojavilo na licu mesta. Ali, prijatelji ubije- nog mladića nasrnuli su na policiju i novinare, pokušavajući da ih spreče da izvrše uviđaj i snime mesto na kojem se ubistvo dogodilo. Ubrzo je stiglo policijsko pojačanje, koje je zaštitilo novinare i obezbedilo im bez- bedan odlazak sa bazena. Međutim, napadači su novinare sačekali ispred agencijske kuće iz koje izveštavaju novinari televizija B92, Pink i Avala, zaustavili ih i ponovo od njih tražili kasete sa snimljenim materijalom. Tom prilikom, novinarima su upućene pretnje smrću ukoliko objave šta se dogodilo.87 Policija je brzo reagovala i identifikovala napadače, da bi posle desetak dana protiv Igora Prvulovića, Miljana Manića i Ivana Lazarevića bila podignuta optužnica za krivična dela nasilničkog ponašanja i spreča- vanja službenog lica u vršenju dužnosti.88

85 Sanja Vajagić, „Bregu čuvaju kao Tita“, Press, 18. jun 2008, str. 25.

86 B. Kuljanin, „Tuča u crkvi“, Kurir, 19. jun 2008, str. 7.

87 „Napadnuti novinari u Zaječaru“, B92, 14. jul 2008.

88 „Optužnica za napad na novinare“, Dnevnik, 24. jul 2008, str. 9.  36 | 37

16. jul – Novinar Regionalne televizije iz Novog Pazara, Medin Halilović, fizič- ki je napadnut u ulici Stefana Nemanje, pri čemu je dobio potres mozga. O incidentu je Halilović izjavio sledeće: „Dok sam se vraćao danas kući sa posla, on mi je prišao i pitao me je po čemu je on to poznat policiji. Rekao mi je da će me ubiti, a potom me je dva puta pesnicom udario u glavu. Tek kasnije su mi prolaznici rekli ime napadača pa sam se setio da sam neko- liko puta izveštavao o incidentima u kojima je on učestvovao.“ Nedugo posle toga policija je uhapsila identifikovanog napadača, Aladina D. 89

19. jul – Bivši policajac Marko Petrović najpre je pretio Stefanu Cvetkoviću, glavnom urednika RTV TNT iz Bele Crkve, a potom ga i pretukao. Inci- dent se dogodio u jednom restoranu u Beloj Crkvi, gde je Cvetković veče- rao sa svojom devojkom, i gde mu je Pavlović prišao i udario ga pesnicom u glavu. Razlog napada je snimak koji je emitovala najpre RTV TNT, a onda i B92, i na kojem se vidi kako Pavlović – koji je u to vreme policajac – konzumira narkotike. Posle emitovanja tog snimka, Pavlović je suspen- dovan sa radnog mesta. Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije (NUNS) i Nezavisno društvo novinara Vojvodine (NDNV) osudili su napad na glav- nog urednika TNT-a i ocenili da su novinari u lokalnim sredinama veoma ugroženi: „Sa bojazni se pitamo šta će biti sledeće ukoliko organi gonjenja na vreme ne sankcionišu počinioce napada. Novinari u lokalnim sredina- ma daleko su više ugroženi nego novinari u Beogradu ili u Novom Sadu. Daleko od očiju javnosti, lokalni moćnici osećaju se dovoljno zaštićenim da pokušavaju da diriguju uredničkim politikama lokalnih medija, a svako ko se tome suprotstavi postaje meta napada.“90

23. jul – Na Trgu slobode u Novom Sadu, gde se održavao miting podrške Radovanu Karadžiću, nepoznata osoba je napala snimatelja TV Apolo i udarila ga u glavu. Napadnuti novinar je iz bezbednosnih razloga želeo da ostane anoniman, pa je novinarka Dragana Aleksić, koja je prisustvovala incidentu, dala sledeću izjavu: „Oko 20 sati kolega i ja smo izašli na Trg Slobode, s obzirom da se tamo skupilo pedesetak mladih ljudi. Moja na- mera je bila da im priđem i pitam ih da li postoji organizator skupa, kako bih uzela izjavu. Kada smo im prišli, velika većina njih, meni se čini, bila

89 „Hapšenje zbog napada na novinara“, B92, 17. jul 2008 (http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Hapsenje-zbog-napada-na-novinara.html).

90 „Urednik dobio pesnicu u glavu zbog video snimaka“, Blic, 20. jul 2008, str. 10. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

je pod narkoticima ili pijana; svi su rekli da su organizatori, da nemam šta da tražim tu i da se sklonim. Sklonila sam se, jer sam videla da je situacija kulminirala i da se nešto može desiti. Međutim, kolega je nastavio da sni- ma. Oni su mu dobacili da prekine, da spusti kameru, ali dečko je otišao u samo središte zbivanja, kod spomenika Svetozaru Miletiću, gde je bila razvučena srpska zastava. Dva mladića su se tu slikala fotoaparatom, jedan je na kapi nosio kokardu. Fotoreporteru su rekli da prestane da snima i da je sa izdajničke televizije. Dečko je spustio kameru i stišao situaciju, dok je jedan od njih prišao meni, a njih trojica, četvorica krenuli prema nama i vikali da ne snimamo. Tada je jedan iz mase prišao s leđa kolegi i udario mu jak šamar preko uha. Bilo je strašno, zaista“.91

23. jul – Kamerman FONET-a, Zoran Jovanović, pogođen je pivskom flašom u glavu u Dečanskoj ulici u Beogradu, tokom demonstracija zbog hap- šenja Radovana Karadžića. Svedok ovog incidenta, holandski mirovnjak Sjers Benker, rekao je da je Jovanovića sa leđa gađao mladić sa fantomkom na glavi.92

24. jul – Tokom demonstracija protiv hapšenja Radovana Kardžića, novinara B92, Boška Brankovića, napali su huligani, koji su mu naneli tešku povredu noge. Novinar Branković je snimao kolonu demonstranata koja se kretala pored turske ambasade: u jednom trenutku je primetio momka koji je ne- što vikao da bi, pošto je okrenuo kameru prema njemu, napadač nasrnuo i oborio ga udarcem. Sve vreme, masa je skandirala „Udri, udri novinara“. Zatim su se u prebijanje novinara uključili i drugi demonstranti, koji su ga šutirali dok je ležao. Kasnije je policija identifikovala i privela četvoricu napadača na Boška Brankovića. Sudski postupak je u toku. 93

24. jul – Policija je tokom akcije koju je sprovodila protiv nasilnih demonstra- nata napala i grupu novinara, koji su stajali sa strane i držali identifikaci- one kartice u rukama. Jedan od onih koji su pretučeni te večeri je i Miloš Đorelijevski, novinar BETE. Đorelijevski je na beogradskim Terazijama naišao na kordon od više desetina policajaca, legitimisao se i rekao da je

91 I. Mihaljević, „Huligani opet biju novinare“, Dnevnik, 24. jul 2008, str. 29.

92 I. Živanović, „Napadnuti novinari i spaljena zastava SPS-a”, Danas, 24. jul 2008, str. 1.

93 „Udri, udri novinara”, B92, 25. jul 2008.  38 | 39

krenuo prema Urgentnom centru. Policajci su tada počeli da viču na njega „pičko jedna napadaš sa leđa“, da bi mu jedan od policajaca prišao, šutnuo ga i pokušao da ga udari pendrekom u testise. Na njegovo pitanje zbog čega to rade, policajci su nastavili da ga tuku. 94

24. jul – Nepoznati napadači pretukli su španske novinare Oskara Martine- za Forcada i Luisa Peresa, dok su izveštavali sa mitinga Srpske radikalne stranke protiv hapšenja Radovana Karadžića. Peres je o incidentu izjavio: „Izveštavali smo sa mitinga SRS-a protiv hapšenja Radovana Karadžića i dok je gospodin Nikolić govorio počeli su sukobi između policije i gru- pe demonstranata. Otišli smo da snimimo sukob i kada smo bili na 20 metara od bine, odjednom su nas napala dva lica. Jedan je udario mog kolegu snimatelja sa leđa, a tri sekunde kasnije drugi je udario u kameru. Kamera je trenutno uništena, a moj kolega je na pregledu u Urgentnom centru. Dobio je jak udarac u leđa i oseća bol, ali ne znamo da li je nešto slomljeno.“ 95

24. jul – Na demonstracijama u Beogradu napadnut je novinar FONET-a, koji je želeo da ostane anoniman. Dok je fotografisao dešavanja, na njega je nasrnula nepoznata osoba, udarila ga nekoliko puta u leđa i razbila mu fotoaparat. 96

28. jul – Tokom demonstracija protiv hapšenja Radovana Karadžića, huliga- ni su napali američkog fotoreportera Rasela Gordona, dok je fotografisao miting. U jednom trenutku mu je sa leđa prišla nepoznata osoba i fizički nasrnula na njega, pokušavajući da mu otme kameru. Napadač mu je re- kao i da odmah napusti miting, „jer provocira okolinu“.97

29. jul – Nakon sukoba huligana sa policijom tokom demonstracija koje je u Beogradu organizovala Srpska radikalna stranka, novinarka Gazete prišla je generalnom sekretaru ove stranke Aleksandru Vučiću u nameri da mu

94 Intervju sa Milošem Đorelijevskim, 24. jul 2008 (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

95 “Hronologija nereda u Beogradu“, B92, 30. jul 2008. (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=07&dd=30&nav_id=310854)

96 Ibid.

97 A. Obradović, „Napali prosrpskog amera“, Kurir, 29. jul 2008, str. 4. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

postavi pitanja, ali su je pristalice radikala napali. Vučić je počeo da viče na novinarku i da joj se unosi u lice, a njegove pristalice počele su da je vređaju, pri čemu joj je jedan od njih prišao i udario je.98

[ Avgust ] 08. avgust – Pripadnik obezbeđenja Gradskog zelenila iz Novog Sada poku- šao je da spreči novinarku lista Dnevnik da fotografiše kako lekari hitne pomoći oživljavaju ženu na kupalištu Štrand u ovom gradu. Novinarka je najpre sprečena da priđe mestu gde se događaj odvijao, a zatim je napa- dač krenuo za njom, pokušavajući da joj otme fotoaparat. Rekao joj je da neće otići odatle sa tim fotoaparatom i načinjenim fotografijama. Zatim je pozvao i policiju, koja je došla i legitimisala novinarku, ali nije htela da se meša u sukob. Novinarka je karticu sa fotografijama ipak uspela da iznese sa Štranda. Već sutradan se portparol Gradskog zelenila u Novom Sadu javno izvinio Dnevniku i rekao da to preduzeće ne može da odgovara za svaki konkretan slučaj i nepristojno ponašanje pojedinih radnika. 99

12. avgust – U redakciju Kraljevačkih novosti upao je Ljubomir V. i pretio pi- štoljem prisutnima. Jednog od novinara je udario drškom pištolja i naneo mu laku telesnu povredu – ogrebotinu na ruci. Rukovodstvo ove medijske kuće podnelo je krivičnu prijavu protiv napadača, zbog sumnje da je izvr- šio krivično delo ugrožavanja sigurnosti, nanošenja lake telesne povrede i nedozvoljeno držanje oružija. Takođe su podneli i prekršajnu prijavu zbog vređanja, zlostavljanja i vršenja nasilja nad drugima.100 Sudija opštinskog suda za prekršaje u Kraljevu osudio je Ljubomira V. na 25 dana zatvora zbog vređanja novinara Kraljevačkih novosti. 101

30. avgust – Predstavnici pokreta „1389“ i organizacije „Obraz“, koji su de- monstrirali zbog hapšenja haškog optuženika Radovana Karadžića, provalili su u prostorije novinske agencije BETA u znak protesta što, po njihovom mišljenju, ova agencija nije izveštavala sa njihovih skupova. De-

98 „Napadnuta novinarka Gazete“, Gazeta, 30. jul 2008, str. 3.

99 I. Brcan, „S tim slikama nećeš izaći sa plaže“, Dnevnik, 9. avgust 2008, str. 35.

100 „Pištoljem pretio novinarima“, Dnevnik, 13. avgust 2008, str. 8,

101 „Zbog vređanja novinara 25 dana zatvora“, 24 časa, 13. avgust 2008, str. 5.  40 | 41

monstranti su sa sobom nosili plakat na kojem je pisalo „Žuta novinska agencija BETA“ i baterijsku lampu, koja je simbolično predstavljala „osvet- ljenje za medijski mrak u Srbiji“.102 Novinari agencije BETA su izjavili i da su prilikom jednog od više upada nepoznata lica fotografisala i snimala kamerom prisutne novinare.103

[ Oktobar ] 17. oktobar – U redakciji dnevnog lista Kurir (Vlajkovićeva ulica, Beograd), oko 8.45 časova ujutro, pronađena je bomba. Pronašla ju je spremačica u jednoj od žardinjera na drugom spratu, gde su smeštene kancelarije upra- ve. Policija je stigla odmah i uklonila bombu. Lica koja su postavila ek- splozivnu napravu još uvek nisu pronađena. 104

22. oktobar – Glavni urednik Geopolitike, Slobodan Erić, utvrdio je – prili- kom redovnog servisiranja svojih kola marke „Ford eskort“ – da mu je nepoznato lice odvrnulo centralni zavrtanj matice prednjeg levog točka, usled čega je moglo doći do teške saobraćajne nesreće. Erić tvrdi da je me- haničar koji je pregledao kola nesumnjivo ustanovio postojanje tragova ključa za demontažu na jednom točku, dok na ostalima nije bilo sličnih tragova. Dodao je i da je počinilac zatim vratio ratkapnu na njeno mesto i time prikrio tragove. Erić nagađa da je, pošto nema ličnih neprijatelja, motiv ugrožavanja njegove bezbednosti uređivački koncept Geopolitike, koji se zasniva na artikulisanju i odbrani srpskih nacionalnih i državnih interesa. 105

[ Novembar ] 02. novembar – Sulejman A., iz sela Veliki Trnovac, napao je Nedžata Behlju- jija –vlasnika televizije Spektri iz Bujanovca – na parkingu ispred ulaza u televiziju. Naneo mu je teške telesne povrede (potres mozga), zbog kojih

102 „Pristalice Karadžića ušle u agenciju BETA“, Press, 31. avgust 2008, str. 9.

103 Iz pisane izjave novinara agencije BETA (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

104 „Nađena bomba u prostorijama Kurira“, B92, 17. oktobar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=10&dd=17&nav_id=324016).

105 M. S. P., „Sabotaža automobila urednika ’Geopolitike’“ , Politika, 23. oktobar 2008, str. A9. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

se Behljuji za pomoć najpre obratio Domu zdravlja u Bujanovcu, a zatim i istoj ustanovi u Vranju. U izjavi koju je dao predstavnicima OEBS-a, Be- hljuji je naveo da je u poslednje vreme često bio meta napada i pretnji. Naveo je i da je izgubio poverenje u policiju, kao i da sâm planira da or- ganizuje vlastito obezbeđenje. „U velikoj sam nevolji i prinuđen sam da branim sebe, porodicu i novinare TV Spektri koji profesionalno obavljaju svoje nimalo lake zadatke“ – rekao je Behljuji.106 Nezavisno udruženje no- vinara Srbije osudilo je ovaj napad i zatražilo je od policije i drugih nad- ležnih organa da zaštite Behljujija i njegovu porodicu, te da im obezbede uslove za normalan život i rad.107

22. novembar – Prema izjavama Slavka i Čedomira Savića, urednika i direktora RTV Kuršumlija, zamenik predsednika opštine Kuršumlija. Dejan Miloše- vić, i zamenik predsednika opštinske skupštine, Branislav Jovanović, upa- li su, zajedno sa pet nepoznatih osoba, u ovu medijsku kuću i zapretili im smrću ukoliko samo još jednom pomenu nekog od njih. Dan pre toga, u jednoj emisiji dotične televizije izneti su podaci o navodnim malverzacija- ma vršenim sa novcem koji je država isplatila vojnim rezervistima za učešće u sukobima na Kosovu 1999. godine. Sa druge strane, Dejan Milošević tvrdi da je sukob između opštine i televizije izbio zbog odbijanja lokalnih vlasti da RTV Kuršumliji isplate novčani iznos od 360.000 dinara. On navodi i da je sa grupom rezervista, nezadovoljan neistinama koje se o njima iznose, obišao ovu televiziju, ali da nije bilo nikakvih pretnji. Policijska uprava Kuršumlije je sutradan pokrenula istragu o ovom incidentu. 108

26. novembar – U centru Novog Sada, u ulici Ilije Ognjanovića, nepoznata lica su oko tri sata izjutra zapalila automobil marke „Porše“, vlasnika novo- sadske televizije Panonija, Zorana Andrića. Novosadska policija je potvr- dila da se incident dogodio, dok Andrić nije želeo da ga komentariše.109

106 Prema Izveštaju OEBS-a.

107 „NUNS osuđuje napada na vlasnika TV Spektri iz Bujanovca“, saopštenje NUNS-a (http://www. nuns.org.yu/aktivnosti/view.jsp?articleId=9941).

108 Pogledati video klip sa izjavama učesnika incidenta: http://www.mefeedia.com/entry/upad-u-rtv-kur-umlija/12369946/.

109 „Zapaljen auto vlasnika TV Panonija“, B92, 27. novembar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=11&dd=27&nav_id=330971).  42 | 43

[ Decembar ] 07. decembar – Nepoznata lica obila su prostorije u kojima se nalazi Neza- visno društvo novinara Vojvodine. U saopštenju koje su objavili NDNV navode da iz prostorija nije odneto ništa pošto nakon prvih vrata koja obijena, postoje još jedna sigurnosna koja provalnici nisu uspeli da obiju. Ovo je treći pokušaj provale u prostorije ovog novinarskog udruženja ove godine, a po rećima rukovodećih ljudi odgovorna lica nisu pronaćena ni u jednom slučaju. 110

110 Obijene prostorije NDNV-a, NDNV, 08. decembar 2008. godine, pogledati veb stranicu: http://www.ndnv.org/vest.php?id=5526 Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

B. PRETNJE, VERBALNI NAPADI I PRITISCI NA NOVINARE

[ Januar ] 08. januar – Direktor i glavni urednik RTV Spektri, Jeton Ismaili i Baki Red- žepi, tvrde da im je gradonačelnik Bujanovca Nagip Arifi pretio, i to nakon teksta koji je Ismaili objavio na web stranici www.presheva.com, gde je kritikovao stav lokalnih vlasti o stopiranju privatizacije RTV Bujanovac. Po njihovim rečima, Arifi ih je pozvao telefonom i pretio im da će uništiti i njihovu televiziju i njih. Ove optužbe Arifi je nazvao potpuno neistini- tim.111

17. januar – Zvonimir Perušić, direktor novinsko-izdavačke kuće Hrvatska riječ, podneo je ostavku uz obrazloženje da više nije mogao da se odupire političkim pritiscima. Po njegovim rečima, Hrvatsko nacionalno vijeće je – kao osnivač pomenutog glasila – nezakonito i pod političkim pritiskom jedne partije donelo odluku o imenovanju novog Upravnog odbora. Pe- rušić je dodao i da se ceo slučaj može shvatiti kao pokušaj političara da zauzdaju i kontrolišu novinarske strukture. Hrvatsko nacionalno vijeće i Demokratski savez Hrvata odbacili su ove optužbe.112

23. januar – Novinarka novopazarskog radija Universa, Senada Leković, na- padnuta je oko 13 časova, dok je prolazila pored hotela „Vrbak“, gde se održavao protest Pazarskog pokreta za promene. O incidentu je dala sle- deću izjavu: „Išla sam da pratim protest radnika i NVO-aktivista u centru grada. Prolazeći pored hotela, ugledala su me lica koja su bila u opštin- skom protokolu; naime, u hotelu se održavala svečana sednica Skupštine opštine. Ta lica iz protokola počela su da mi dobacuju i da mi prete. Ja sam skromna žena, okrenuta veri, poslu i svom detetu. Ja ne mogu da kažem javnosti kakve ružne reči su mi upućene, a bilo je i pretnji. Prošla sam

111 Vidi izveštaj od 15. januara 2008 (Dokumentacija OEBS-a).

112 http://www.subotica.info/press.php?tag_id=1368&press_id=536  44 | 45

ćuteći, a kasnije sam slučaj prijavila policiji. Svi koji me poznaju znaju da nisam zaslužila ovakve neprijatnosti.“113 Mešihat Islamske zajednice u Sr- biji, na čijem je čelu muftija Muamer Zukorlić, saopštio je da su na Senadu Leković nasrnuli visoki funkcioneri koalicije Lista za Sandžak i službenici novopazarske opštine. Informativna služba novopazarske opštine negirala je bilo kakvo učešće u napadu na novinarku. 114

[ Februar ] 10. februar – Fotoreporteru nedeljnika Subotičke uskraćeno je pravo na izve- štavanje sa skupa „Veliko prelo“ koji je organizovao Hrvatski kulturni centar iz Subotice. Zlatko Jovanov je u subotičku Halu sportova, gde je 2. februara organizovana pomenuta manifestacija, pokušao da uđe uz va- žeću novinarsku legitimaciju, ali mu je saopšteno da mogu da uđu samo akreditovani novinari, pri čemu njegova redakcija nije dobila upitnik za akreditaciju. Kada je pokušao da uđe na drugi ulaz i sa organizatorima otkloni nesporazum, Jovanova su izbacili ljudi iz obezbeđenja, uz obrazlo- ženje da su dobili takvo naređenje.115

17. februar – Prema izjavi novinarke radio BETA RFI Jovane Đurović, tokom demonstracija zbog proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova u Beogradu, grupa okupljenih navijača joj je pretila „dobićeš batine jer si izdajnik“.116

19. februar – Fotoreporteru dnevnog lista Alo! – koji je dao izjavu predstav- nicima OEBS-a, ali je želeo da ostane anoniman – upućene su pretnje na administrativnoj granici između Kosova i Srbije na prelazu Jarinje dok je snimao protest lokalnog stanovništva koji se kasnije pretvorio u akciju protiv pograničnih objekata. Novinar je rekao: „Situacija je bila specifična jer su demonstranti bili svesni da napadi na granične objekte nisu legalni, ali su bili namereni da ih izvedu. U takvim situacijama demonstranti ne žele da se njihovi postupci dokumentuju i pojave sutradan u novinama, jer to može biti zakonska osnova za akcije protiv njih. Kada sam krenuo da

113 E. H., „Napad na novinarku”, Alo!, 25. januar 2008, str. 3.

114 „Pretnje novinarki Senadi Leković”, Politika, 25. januar 2008, str. A10.

115 „Hrvatski kulturni centar uskratio snimanje Subotičkim“, Pravda, 11. februar 2008, str. 8.

116 Iz pisane izjave Jovane Đurović (Dokumentacija OEBS-a). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

snimam, nekoliko ljudi mi je prišlo i reklo mi: ’Nemoj čupavi da se zajeba- vaš da nas snimaš, odvalićemo te.’ Pošto sam na ranijim iskustvima naučio koliko su ovakve pretnje ozbiljne nisam ih snimao.“ 117

21. februar – Grupa demonstranata se oko 20 časova okupila oko prostorija RTV B92 na Novom Beogradu, da bi nešto kasnije njih desetak krenulo prema zgradi sa kamenicama u rukama, ali ih je policija zaustavila. Direk- tor RTV B92 Veran Matić izjavio je da je na adresu te medijske kuće neko- liko dana pre ovog incidenta stigao veliki broj pretećih poruka u kojima se otvoreno govorilo o paljenju ove zgrade (koju B92 samo zakupljuje, jer je ona u vlasništvu države Srbije). Urednik programa televizije B92 info, Igor Božić, u izjavi predstavnicima OEBS-a je rekao: „U pitanju je selektivan napad, jer su huligani u tom trenutku opkoljavali zgradu u kojoj se radio TV program. Jasno je bilo da je cilj bio napad na zgradu u kojoj su novina- ri. Jasno je takođe da je napad bio politički kontrolisan i da je neko orga- nizovao grupe huligana čiji zadatak je bio da pokažu da je B92 izdajnička TV-stanica.“118 Božić je dodao da su napadači bili pripadnici navijačkih grupa i da se kasnije ispostavilo da je istoga dana na sednici Vlade tadašnji ministar za kapitalne investicije, Velimir Ilić, najavio incidente. Na kraju je dodao i da se posledice napada osećaju u vidu uzavrele i napete atmosfere u redakciji.

26. februar – Toga dana održano je suđenje zaječarskom gradonačelniku i njegovim saradnicima po optužbi da su falsikovali opštinski budžet. Su- dija Zoran Jovanović je udaljio novinare Nove timočke revije iz sudnice, iako su se i oni – poput kolega iz ostalih redakcija – uredno legitimisali. Jedan od osnovnih principa u savremenim pravnim sistemima je javnost suđenja. 119

27. februar – Danica Vučenić, novinaka RTV B92 i voditeljka radio emisije Kažiprst, bila je izložena pretnjama dok je sa svojom prijateljicom sedela u restoranu „Ruski car“ (u centru Beograda). Predstavnicima OEBS-a je da-

117 Pisana izjava novinara dnevnog lista Alo! (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

118 Pisana izjava Igora Božića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

119 Intervju sa Milošem Zdravkovićem, izdavačem Nove timočke revije, 28. februar 2008 (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).  46 | 47

la sledeću izjavu: „Čim smo ušle u restoran primetila sam da jedan čovek specifičnog izgleda – kratko ošišan, snažan, u majici kratkih rukava iako je bilo hladno, upadljivo gleda u mene. Sedele smo za stolom nekoliko metara udaljenom od njegovog. On je bio sam. Sve vreme je razgovarao telefonom i gledao u mene. Gledao je toliko upadljivo da je čak i moja prijateljica koja nije iz medijske priče to primetila. Posle više od dvadeset minuta ustao je i krenuo pravo prema nama. Došao je do stola, zastao pola sekunde i pod uglom od devedeset stepeni se okrenuo i nastavio prema izlazu. Načinio je nekoliko koraka, okrenuo se i pogledao me upadljivo bez reči. Ponovo je nastavio ka izlazu. Na leđima njegove majice bio je am- blem i natpis Jedinice za specijalne operacije. Ovaj događaj je bio klasična manifestacija zastrašivanja.“120

28. februar – Novinarka novosadske televizije Most optužila je funkcionera Gradskog odbora Lige socijaldemokrata Vojvodine Zorana Petakova da joj je pretio, rekavši da će ako dođe do nove revolucije ta televizija biti šesta na spisku onih koji će biti zapaljene, a da on nosi pištolj, koji je spre- man da upotrebi. Nakon toga, Sekretarijat za informisanje LSV-a izvinio se televiziji Most i rekao da će Petakov snositi odgovornost zbog ovog in- cidenta.121

[ Mart ] 01. mart – Nekoliko pripadnika organizacije „Sabor srpskih dveri“ pokušalo je da prekine promociju emisije Peščanik u Pančevu. Nakon izlaganja Srđe Popovića, desetak mladića počelo je glasno da negoduje. Potom su poku- šali da na silu uzmu reč u čemu su ih sprečili policija, publika i govornici. Novinarka i voditeljka radio emisije Peščanik, Svetlana Lukić, izjavila je: „Po onome što smo saznali od jednog od pripadnika policije, grupa mla- dića je zaustavljena na Pančevačkom mostu, odnosno policija im nije do- zvolila da uđu u Pančevo. Međutim, nekoliko mladića je ipak ušlo u salu i pokušalo, nakon desetak minuta, da prekine tribinu glasno negodujući protiv onoga što se čulo na promociji Peščanika.“ Direktor Doma omladi-

120 Iz pisane izjave Danice Vučenić (Dokumentacija OEBS-a).

121 http://www.rtv.co.yu/sr/vesti/vojvodina/vojvodina/2008_02_27/vest_52894.jsp Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

ne u Pančevu (gde je promocija održana), Radiša Stanišić, rekao je kako je tokom tribine stigla anonimna dojava da je u sali postavljena bomba. 122

02. mart – Na godišnjoj skupštini Opštinskog odbora Srpske radikalne stran- ke u Sremskoj Mitrovici, predsednik Okružnog odbora SRS-a za Srem, Vi- tomir Plužarević, pretio je lokalnim sredstvima informisanja. Plužarević je tom prilikom rekao da je uočio „neprijatelje“ SRS-a i da su to „sredstva in- formisanja, tačnije Sremska televizija, M novine i Rumske novine“. Dodao je i da im zamera „što u etar ne puštaju ideje SRS-a i što nisu napisali nije- dan pozitivan članak o SRS-u“. Svojim kolegama Plužarević je predložio da „kada dođu na vlast na drugi način razgovaraju sa pomenutim medijskim kućama“ i obećao im „da će se kvalitetnim tehnologijama i metodama bo- riti protiv tih sistema koji su protiv srpskih radikala i eliminisati ih“. Glav- na urednica M novina, Svetlana Cucanić, izjavila je povodom incidenta da je Vitomir Plužarević javna ličnost i poslanik, zbog čega njegove reči imaju posebnu težinu: „Neodgovorna upotreba prejakih reči može imati nesagledive posledice. Niko ne zna gde će te reči udariti, na koji način i kojom silinom.“ Vladimir Ćosić, glavni urednik Rumskih novina, rečnik Vitomira Plužarevića nazvao je „gebelsovskim“ i dodao: „Šta će biti ako se neko oseti pozvanim da te reči iskoristi kao podstrek i alibi za stvarno nasilje? Neke mlade kolege se zaista plaše da SRS može da počne da gasi redakcije, da mogu ostati bez posla ili proći još gore.“123

07. mart – U 19.10 časova redakcija dnevnog lista Gazeta dobila je anonimnu dojavu da je u zgradi u kojoj se nalaze njene prostorije postavljena bomba. Ubrzo je stigla specijalna policijska ekipa koja je nakon detaljnog pregleda svih prostorija utvrdila da je dojava bila lažna. Sekretarica Gazete kaže da je poziv koji je primila bio prikriven i da je muški glas pretećim tonom re- kao „U zgradi je postavljena tempirana bomba“ i odmah spustio slušalicu. Antonije Kovačević, glavni i odgovorni urednik redakcije Gazeta, izjavio je da je ova pretnja još jedna u nizu pritiska na medije: „Neko koristi hao- tičnu situaciju u zemlji da stvori atmosferu straha. Očekujem od države da

122 „Pančevci odbranili Peščanik”, B92, 2. mart 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index. php?yyyy=2008&mm=03&dd=02&nav_id=287261).

123 Jovan Milević, „Optužbe i pretnje medijima”, Vreme, 24. april 2008, str. 4.  48 | 49

otkrije počinioce i da zaštiti slobodu javne reči i informisanja, i tako omo- gući novinarima da obavljaju svoj posao bez straha za sopstveni život.“124

15. mart – Momčilu Đorđeviću, novinaru nedeljnika Nedeljni telegraf iz Be- ograda, stiglo je pismo u kojem mu se preti likvidacijom zbog tekstova koje je objavljivao. U pismu se navodi i da je Nedeljni telegraf antisrpska novina, kojoj je cilj da proda zemlju Amerikancima, NATO-u i Evropskoj uniji. U izjavi koju je dao predstavnicima OEBS-a, Đorđević je naglasio da je veoma uplašen zbog pretnji koje je dobio i da mu je zbog toga otežan rad. Dodao je i da su pretnje prijavljene policiji, ali da napadači nisu iden- tifikovani. 125

23. mart – Na adresu redakcije Nedeljnog telegrafa stigle su pretnje vlasniku Momčilu Torgoviću i novinarki tog lista Danijeli Milinković. U pismu je stajalo: „Ne piše vam se dobro! Pazite da vam metak ne prosvira glavu! Spremite se za večna lovišta. Letećete u vazduh. Pripazi se kada sedaš u auto jer bi mogao da odletiš u zrak i raspadneš se u tisuću komada.“ Pre- ma rečima Torgovića, pismo je potpisano sa „Crvene beretke“. Redakcija Nedeljnog telegrafa je o ovim pretnjama obavestila policiju.126 Pretnje Ne- deljnom telegrafu osudilo je i Međunarodno udruženje novinara sa sedi- štem u Briselu. 127

24. mart – Prema pisanju dnevnog lista Kurir, njihov novinar Vuk Stanković je nakon nekoliko objavljenih tekstova o tadašnjem ministru ekonomije i regionalnog razvoja, Mlađanu Dinkiću, primio poziv od Nikole Papka – portparola političke stranke G17+, čiji je Dinkić predsednik – koji mu je pretio da će od njega biti naplaćena odšteta od više hiljada evra. 128

124 Bombom na istinu“, Gazeta, 8. mart 2007, str. 9.

125 Iz pisane izjave Momčila Đorđevića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

126 „Pretnje vlasniku i novniarki Nedeljnog telegrafa”, Blic, 24. mart 2008, (http://www.blic.co.yu/hronika.php?id=35253).

127 Ibid

128 „Dinkićev potrčko preti”, Kurir, 25. mart 2008, str. 6 (http://www.kurir-info.rs/clanak/kurir-25-03-2008/dinkicev-potrcko-preti). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

30. mart – Nepoznata lica pozvala su redakciju nedeljnika Pirotske novine iz Pirota i dojavili da će uskoro eksplodirati četiri bombe. Prema rečima zaposlenih, nepoznati muški glas se predstavio kao komandant Bugarske oslobodilačke armije za pirotski rejon i kazao da će eksplozije uslediti tač- no u 11 sati. Jake policijske snage su odmah stigle i utvrdile da je dojava bila lažna i da u zgradama nema eksplozivnih naprava. 129

[ April ] 11. april – U Novom Sadu je uhapšen Dinko Gruhonjić, predsednik Nezavi- snog udruženja novinara Vojvodine i šef novosadskog dopisništva agen- cije BETA. Gruhonjić je toga dana otišao na skup pokreta Otpor, kako bi uzeo izjave i napisao članak o tome. Dok je intervjuisao organizatore skupa, prišla im je policija i tražila da pokažu lične karte, kao i dozvolu za okupljanje. Gruhonjić se odmakao par metara jer je kao novinar želeo da stekne sliku o njihovoj konverzaciji. Nakon što su policajci tražili i nje- govu ličnu kartu – koju je on odbio da im pokaže uz obrazloženje da nije postojao razlog za njegovo legitimisanje i da on nije organizator skupa – Gruhonjić je priveden u policijsku stanicu. Tokom 2007. godine, Gru- honjić i njegova porodica dobili su ozbiljne pretnje preko neonacističkog veb-sajta „Stormfront“.130

[ Maj ] 05. maj – Visoka funkcionerka Srpske radikalne stranke i tadašnja predsedni- ca opštine Zemun, Gordana Pop Lazić, izjavila je da će se ta stranka boriti protiv svih medija koji podržavaju proevropske snage. U emisiji Uveća- nje, koja se prikazuje na televiziji B92 info, ona je izjavila: „Mi moramo da radimo pre svega na osvešćenju mlade generacije i da ih negujemo u patriotskom i nacionalnom duhu. Moramo, nažalost, da se izborimo i sa medijima koji pomažu ovim evro-unijatskim snagama jer to nije dobro, a i sa nevladinim organizacijama koje to takođe rade.“131 Dragan Janjić, po-

129 „Lažne dojave u Pirotu i Subotici”, B92, 31. mart 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=03&dd=31&nav_id=291687).

130 Intervju sa Nedimom Sejdinovićem i Dinkom Gruhonjićem, 11. april 2008 (Dokumentacija).

131 „SRS: Osvešćivanje omladine“, B92, 6. maj 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=05&dd=06&nav_id=297171).  50 | 51

moćnik ministra kulture zadužen za medije, prokomentarisao je ovu izja- vu: „Postoji razlika između prava političara i svakog građanina da ukaže i da se buni protiv loše predstavljenih činjenica, ali nijedan političar nema pravo da najavljuje da će da guši medije koji faktički imaju uređivačku politiku kakva njemu ne odgovara.“132

09. maj – Na brojeve mobilnih telefona nekoliko novinara, dopisnika i ured- nika dnevnog lista Kurir, toga su dana stigle SMS-poruke sa pretnjama da se „paze i pričuvaju posle 11. maja“, „da bi novinare Kurira trebalo pobiti i streljati jer sprovode antisrpsku politiku“, kao i poruke poput „Vi iz Kurira ste antisrpska mafijaška govna“.133

09. maj – Redakcija dnevnih novina Kurir saopštila je da je novinar te medij- ske kuće, Oliver Nikolić, uhapšen dok je obavljao zadatak u Komercijalnoj banci, u beogradskoj Svetogorskoj ulici. Novinska agencija BETA prenela je da je Nikolić trebalo da proveri dokumentaciju vezanu za poslovanje te banke, ali da je obezbeđenje pozvalo policiju, koja ga je na licu mesta uhapsila. 134

15. maj – Sekretar opštinskog odbora Socijalističke partije Srbije i predsednik Skupštine opštine Apatin, Miodrag Bakić, verbalno je napao Sofiju Pau- lić Škero – dugogodišnju novinarku Radio Apatina i lokalnih novina Glas komune. Bakić je optužio novinarku za pristrasno izveštavanje o izbornoj kampanji, jer je kandidatu grupe građana Pokret za Apatin navodno dato više minuta u informativnom programu nego svim drugim kandidatima zajedno. On je novinarku napao i zato što je tolerisala ulični rečnik pro- tivničkog kandidata – navodno, jer je i sama na listi grupe građana Pokret za Apatin. Povodom incidenta, Sofija Paulić Škero je izjavila: „Gruba je laž da se nalazim na listi Pokreta za Apatin i da sam za nju prikupljala potpise. Bakić je u ime lokalnog vrha svoje partije pokrenuo hajku na mene, koje je bilo i do sada. Strah koji pokušava da seje, neistine koje iznosi, atak su na

132 „Janjić: Političari moraju da odgovaraju za ono što kažu“, Blic, 6. maj 2008 (http://www.blic.co.yu/politika.php?id=40618).

133 „Prete i dopisnicima Kurira“, Kurir, 10. maj 2008 (http://www.kurir-info.rs/clanak/kurir-10-05-2008/prete-i-dopisnicima-kurira).

134 „Uhapšen novinar Kurira”, Glas javnosti, 10. maj 2008 (http://www.naslovi.net/2008-05-10/glas-javnosti/uhapsen-novinar-kurira/667646). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

integritet ličnosti i novinarske profesije, zbog čega ću se obratiti i Međuna- rodnoj federaciji novinara.“135

15. maj – Vlasnica i urednica valjevskog nedeljnika Pečat, Željka Milićević, pretila je u uredničkom komentaru novog broja tog lista uredniku valjev- skog mesečnika i dopisniku agencije BETA, Branku Vićentijeviću, tako što mu je, komentarišući njegovo zdravstveno stanje, obećala „besplatnu čitu- lju u 8.000 primeraka“. Veliki broj valjevskih medija izdao je saopštenje za javnost, u kojem je osuđen postupak urednice Pečata.136 U septembru je Opštinski sud u Valjevu Željku Milićević kaznio sa 600.000 dinara, pošto nije u zakonskom roku odgovorila na tužbu koju je Vićentijević podneo za naknadu nematerijalne štete. 137

17. maj – Prema izjavi novinara lista Bečejski mozaik, direktor Poljoprivred- no-industrijskog kombinata „Bečej“, Dragan Satarić, kao i predstavnici sindikalnih organizacija i radnici kombinata, verbalno su napali novinar- ku ove medijske kuće dok je izveštavala o davanju državne zemlje u zakup. Novinarka je želela da ostane anonimna, a tvrdi da joj je rečeno kako „zna- mo za koga radiš“, „neće biti dobro za tebe ako budeš izveštavala o ovome“ i slično. Dodala je i da ovaj verbalni napad nije prvi i da su se slične stvari dešavale više puta tokom proleća i leta 2008. godine. 138

20. maj – Nekoliko novinara i fotoreportera su se okupili u Osnovnoj školi „Sonja Marinković“, kako bi pratili disciplinski postupak protiv osam uče- nika koji su zlostavljali jednu učenicu i snimak tog zlostavljanja postavili na veb-sajt YouTube, ali su izbačeni na ulicu. Nakon što su direktoru po- kazali novinarske legitimacije, majka jednog od učenika je – dok su čekali ispred sale u kojoj je vođen disciplinski postupak – počela da ih vređa, što je rezultiralo izbacivanjem novinara iz zgrade. Sve vreme su i sami učenici

135 “Hajka uz gomilu laži”, Danas, 16. maj 2008, (http://www.danas.rs/vesti/drustvo/terazije/hajka_uz_gomilu_lazi.14.html?news_id=91339)

136 „Najavili besplatnu čitulju kolegi“, Blic, 16. maj 2008 (http://www.blic.co.yu/srbija.php?id=40993).

137 P. V., „Kažnjena urednica Pečata”, Blic, 4. oktobar 2008, str. 2.

138 Iz pisane izjave novinarke Bečejskog mozaika (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).  52 | 53

sudelovali u vređanju, pri čemu je nekolicina tvrdila kako bi trebalo da se „okupe, sačekaju, prebiju i zapale novinare“. 139

21. maj – Prema pisanju dnevnog lista Kurir, Srđan Đoković – otac poznatog srpskog tenisera, Novaka Đokovića – upao je u kabinu RTS-a iz koje je re- porter Nebojša Višković prenosio polufinalni teniski meć između Đokovi- ća i španskog tenisera Rafaela Nadala. Teniserov otac je bio nezadovoljan načinom na koji Višković prenosi meč, pa mu je, prema pisanju Kurira, rekao: „Kako to prenosiš? Šta samo hvališ Nadala?! Pa Novak je Srbin, va- ljda smo patriote!“ Kurir prenosi i da je Viškovića nakon meča pozvao Novakov stric Goran Đoković, koji mu je poručio da „pazi jer može svašta da mu se desi“. 140

23. maj – Nakon objavljivanja teksta pod nazivom „Savo Majmun protiv Aleksandra Vučića“ u izdanju beogradskog dnevnog lista Pravda u kojem je objavljena i reportaža sa jednog od mitinga pred gradskom skupštinom Beograda – pri čemu je na veoma negativan način pisano o ovom fudba- leru i bivšem reprezentativcu Srbije –Milošević je, prema rečima novinara Pravde, pozvao redakciju ovog lista i rekao: „Dovešću svoje ljude, obraču- naću se sa vama i uništiću vam novine.“ 141

25. maj – U 11.40 časova, nepoznati muški glas je pozvao redakciju kikin- dskog radija VK i rekao da je u njenim prostorijama postavljena bomba. Dojava se dogodila u trenutku dok je na televiziji VK emitovan dokumen- tarni film sa govorima ubijenog premijera Zorana Đinđića. Zaposleni su odmah evakuisani iz zgrade, dok je policija izvršila pretragu i utvrdila da je dojava bila lažna. Realizatorka Borjana Bosančić izjavila je: „Muški glas srednjih godina pitao je: ’Da li je to VK?’ Kada sam potvrdno odgovorila, rekao je ’Postavljena vam je bomba’ i spustio slušalicu. U tom trenutku sam bila sama u redakciji, pa sam odmah nazvala Zorana Mileševića, po- tom sam upozorila kolege s televizije, a onda pozvala policiju. U međuvre-

139 „Prebićemo i zapaliti novinara“, Građanski list, 19. maj 2008 (http://www.gradjanski.rs/navigacija.php?vest=22535&naslovna=1).

140 „Srđan izribao Viška“, Kurir, 22. maja 2008 (http://www.kurir-info.rs/clanak/kurir-22-05-2008/srdan-izribao-viska).

141 „Savo Milošević zvani Majmun preti novinarima“, Pravda, 24. maj 2008. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

menu su u redakciju došle dve koleginice, ali nam je policija naredila da svi napustimo zgradu.“ 142

26. maj – Kamermanu televizije VK, Zoranu Tornjanskom, zabranjen je ula- zak u zgradu SO Kikinda prilikom pokušaja da izveštava sa planiranog potpisivanja koalicionog sporazuma između Srpske radikalne stranke, Demokratske stranke Srbije i Socijalističke partije Srbije. Tornjanskom se priključio i drugi novinar ove medijske kuće, Dejan Stepanov. Na njihovo pitanje „Zašto VK televizija ne može da snima i izveštava sa tog doga- đaja?“, portir koji je stajao na ulazu u zgradu rekao im je da „samo radi svoj posao“. U pismu koje je ova medijska kuća poslala domaćim i me- đunarodnim institucijama za zaštitu ljudskih prava i novinarske profesije stoji: „Ovo je već drugi slučaj koji se ponavlja u nepunih 48 sati, jer našem izveštaču nije bio dozvoljen ulazak u zgradu i u nedelju, kada smo želeli da saznamo podatke o izlaznosti birača od predsednika opštinske izborne komisije. Za današnji događaj naša kuća nije dobila čak ni poziv, iako su sve ostale medijske redakcije i izveštači na događaj uredno pozvani.“ 143

[ Jun ] 03. jun – Nepoznato lice pozvalo je oko 10.30 redakciju dnevnog lista Glas javnosti u beogradskoj Vlajkovićevoj ulici, te reklo da je u zgradi postavlje- na bomba i da se ta poruka prenese „kome treba“. Svi zaposleni su odmah napustili prostorije, koje su specijalne jedinice policije sa psima tragačima pretražile, ali nisu pronašle ništa. 144

04. jun – Komisija Opštinskog veća Svilajnca naredila je prekid televizijskog programa TV Resava, a zatim i zamenila brave na prostorijama koje je ova

142 „Lažna bomba na lokalnoj televiziji”, Blic, 26. maj 2008 (http://www.blic.co.yu/vojvodina.php?id=43107).

143 „Koalicija u Kikindi samo za odabrane medije“, Blic, 28. maja 2008 (http://www.blic.co.yu/vojvodina.php?id=43392).

144 „Lažna dojava u redakciji Glasa“, B92, 4. jun 2008 (http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Lazna-dojava-u-redakciji-Glasa.html).  54 | 55

televizija delila sa najstarijim lokalnim listom u Srbiji – Resavskim pošto- nošom. 145

10. jun – Na sajtu neonacističke organizacije „Stormfront“ pojavile su se pret- nje novinaru novosadskog lista Dnevnik, Željku Balabanu. Balaban se kao novinar već dugo vremena bavi stanjem ljudskih prava pripadnika LGBT populacije. Jedan od forumaša ovog sajta je napisao: „Sada novinari uveli- ko nazivaju fašistima sve koji su protiv seksualno izopačenih, i to kod nas hladno prolazi. Stvarno nema smisla i pitam se da li je taj gospodin novi- nar možda i gej. Pa, gospodine Balaban, ako si gej, onda idi znaš kuda, a ako nisi, onda mi se javi da se vidimo jer me jako zanima kako možeš tako da pišeš. Sigurno te neko plaća jer svaki normalan čovek beži od pedera kao đavo od krsta. A svima koje hoće da razjure sve pederske manifestacije predlažem odstojala jaja i paradajz kao sredstvo ubeđivanja.“146

13. jun – Direktor nedeljnika Bratstvo, Nebojša Ivanov, uveo je – prema navo- dima uredništva ove medijske kuće – cenzuru, koja se ogleda u sprečava- nju vršioca dužnosti glavnog i odgovornog urednika, Momira Todorova, da objavi tekst „Novčano zasedanje Nacionalnog saveta“, čiji je autor no- vinar i urednik Kiril Georgiev. Nacionalni savet Bugara je 2007. godine od Vlade Republike Srbije preuzeo osnivačka prava nad listom Bratstvo, koji postoji već 49 godina. NUNS je povodom incidenta izdao saopštenje u kojem je istakao da će „svim sredstvima pomoći novinarima i urednicima Bratstva u borbi protiv samovolje njihovog direktora, koji bi kao pravnik morao da zna da je cenzura u Srbiji zakonom zabranjena i da uređivanje novine nije u njegovoj nadležnosti“. 147

15. jun – Novosadskoj policiji je telefonom javljeno da je u prostorijama RTV Panonija podmetnuta bomba i da će eksplozija uslediti u 20.30 časova. O tome je odmah obavešteno osoblje ove medijsku kuće. Pošto su specijal- ne jedinice policije pregledale sve prostorije, utvrđeno je da je dojava bila lažna. 148

145 Izveštaj UNS.

146 N. Jakovljev, „Oglasili se iz pacovskih kanala“, Dnevnik, 11. jun 2008, str. 6.

147 „NUNS: Osuda cenzure u Bratstvu”, BETA, 13. jun 2008.

148 „Dojava o bombi u RTV Panonija”, Danas, 16. jun 2008, str. 25. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

15. jun – Oko 23 časa, redakciji RTS-a – koja u Srbiji ima status javnog servisa – stigao je telefonski poziv u kojem je nepoznati muški glas rekao „Po- stavljena vam je bomba“. U tom trenutku u zgradi se nalazilo 36 radnika. Kontradiverziona jedinica policije ubrzo je stigla u prostorije ove medij- ske kuće i nakon detaljnih pregleda utvrdila da je reč o lažnoj dojavi. 149

17. jun – Direktor novinske agencije TANJUG, Luka Mičeta, podneo je neo- pozivu ostavku zbog, po njegovim rečima, „velikih pritisaka na ovu agen- ciju od strane države“, koji su kulminirali u pokušaju policije da izbaci zaposlene iz prostorija TANJUG-ovog press-centra u beogradskoj Knez Mihajlovoj ulici. Mičeta naglašava da te prostorije već 30 godina pripadaju TANJUG-u i da Nino Brajović, predsednik Udruženja novinara Srbije i Udruženja novinara Srbije i Crne Gore, želi da im otme prostor.150 Sa dru- ge strane, Brajović je kazao da TANJUG ovom udruženju već godinama ne plaća prostor, koji im se izdaje po simboličnoj ceni od 1,3 evra po kvadrat- nom metru, a da istovremeno po komercijalnoj ceni iznajmljuje vlastiti prostor na Obilićevom vencu. Po njegovom mišljenju, ukoliko bi situacija ostala ovakva, Udruženje novinara Srbije i Crne Gore finansiralo bi rad TANJUG-a, što je nedopustivo.151 Trgovinski sud u Beogradu je sredinom jula izrekao novčanu kaznu od 550.000 dinara agenciji TANJUG i bivšem generalnom direktoru Luki Mičeti zbog sprečavanja policije i sudskih iz- vršitelja da ih isele iz prostorija.152

19. jun – Prilikom snimanja priloga o placu zbog kojeg Petar Petrović vo- di imovinski spor u Novom Pazaru, dve osobe pretile su novinarki Ivani Milić i snimatelju TV Jedinstvo, Edisu Klimenti. Novinarka je povodom incidenta izjavila: „Snimali smo plac u vlasništvu Petra Petrovića na kome je neko drugi podigao kuću. Kada smo sa Petrovićem došli u centar grada, prišla su nam dva čoveka i rekla nam da će nas zaklati ako objavimo ono što smo snimili. Petrović je 2000. godine dobio plac, ali mu je imovina uzurpirana. Vrhovni sud potvrdio je njegovo vlasništvo, ali čovek ne može

149 „Lažna bomba u RTS“, Večernje novosti, 16. jun 2008, str. 15.

150 N. S., „Mom mazohizmu je došao kraj“, Pravda, 18. jun 2008, str. 6.

151 „Opet sprečeno iseljenje MPC TANJUG“, B92, 17. jun 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=06&dd=17&nav_id=304186).

152 „Novčane kazne za TANJUG i bivšeg generalnog direktora“, UNS, 17. jul 2008.  56 | 57

da zaštiti svoju imovinu. Želela sam da novinarski istražim ovaj slučaj, ali sam dobila ozbiljne pretnje.“ Istog popodneva, novopazarska policija je identifikovala i privela dve osobe koje su pretile novinarskoj ekipi.153

[ Jul ] 04. jul – Posle upoznavanja javnosti sa incidentom koji se dogodio 17. juna u crkvi Svete Trojice u Dušanovcima, kada je sveštenik napao novinara Dečije televizije, episkop žički Hrizostom je svim arhijerejskim namesni- cima, crkvenim opštinama i upravama manastira poslao pismo kojim se toj televizijskoj kući zabranjuje snimanje hramova i manastira sa područja Eparhije Žičke. Tim povodom je osnivač Dečije televizije, Miodrag Gavrić, izjavio: „Zabrana je eksplicitna, dostavljena sa pečatom i ličnim potpisom vladike Hrizostoma. Međutim, iz pisma se vidi da je vladika Hrizostom zabranio samo nama snimanje, iako su snimak nezavisno od nas emitova- le i RTS, Avala i neke druge televizije. Ovo znači da se pravi selekcija i da neko pokušava da zatvori našu kuću.“154

18. jul – Vlasnik TV Aldi iz Preševa, Isuf Memeti, izjavio je da su lica iz RTV Preševo, na čelu sa urednicom Arditom Behljulji, isključila predajnik nje- gove televizije koji se nalazi na Reljanskom ritu, čime je prekinuto emi- tovanje signala. Televizija Preševo, koja još uvek nije privatizovana, nije dobila frekvenciju za emitovanje programa, dok je TV Aldi jedina koja na području preševske opštine raspolaže dozvolom, kao i kadrovskim i tehničkim uslovima za emitovanje programa. 155

14. jul – Zbog neisplaćenih zarada, 14 novinara ugašenog lista Kurir sport organizovalo je, ispred redakcije dnevnog lista Kurir u Vlajkovićevoj ulici, performans pod nazivom „Vešanje novinara“. Novinari tvrde se radi o od- govoru vlasniku Kurira Raji Rodiću, koji im je prethodno poručio da „je- dino što može da im donira je novac za kupovinu konopca za vešanje“. 156

153 E.H., „Pretnje novinarskoj ekipi TV Jedinstvo“, Blic, 20. jun 2008, str. 2.

154 B. Kuljanin, „Hoće da nas zatvore”, Glas javnosti, 5. jul 2008, str. 32.

155 „Isključen predajnik licencirane RTV Aldi“, Danas, 19. jul 2008.

156 „Protest“, Večernje novosti, 15. jul 2008, str. 7. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

16. jul – Pomoćniku programskog direktora RTV Bor, Bobanu Jovanoviću, te- lefonski je zaprećeno smrću. Nepoznati muški glas mu je rekao: „Idi iz Bo- ra sam, da ne ideš sa nogama napred.“ Jovanović je pre toga javno govorio o lošem finansijskom stanju u ovoj medijskoj kući, a podržao je i predlog da se donedavni direktor Jovan Mitrović privremeno udalji sa posla zbog toga što je, po Jovanovićevom mišljenju, potpisao ugovor koji je štetan za RTV Bor. Osim toga, Jovanović je otvorio i temu sumnjivih privatizacija i problema u javnim preduzećima. O samom incidentu je rekao: „Nije ovo prvi put da mi prete zbog posla kojim se bavim. Načeli smo neke teme koje su bile zabranjene i to se očigledno nekome ne sviđa. Uprkos tome, posao ću obavljati još kvalitetnije i profesionalnije, ali očekujem da javnost osudi ovakav postupak.“ Novinar Boban Jovanović je svojevremeno – zajedno sa Milanom Pantićem, koji je ubijen i čije ubice još uvek nisu pronađene – u Jagodini radio na emisiji Klackalica. 157

20. jul – U jednoj emisiji lokalne televizije u Boru, Saša Mirković – menadžer i predsednik upravnog odbora javnog preduzeća Štampa, radio i film – op- tužio je predsednika opštine, Branislava Rankića, da loše radi svoj posao. Mirković tvrdi da je nakon emisije sa službenog broja predsednika opštine stiglo nekoliko SMS-poruka preteće sadržine: „Kretenu, pukao si, a šta si govorio za mene molićeš da ti oprostim“, „Kretenčino, imaš li komentar ili ćeš u ponedeljak da mi pušiš“ i „Govno crveno, marš u Beograd“. U izjavi koju je dao nakon incidenta, Mirković je dodao: „Zabrinut sam za svoj život. Ovo su vrlo opasne pretnje i shvatio sam ih ozbiljno. Hvala Po- licijskoj upravi i inspektorima koji su odmah primili krivičnu prijavu... U toku emisije, zvala je i doktorka Marković koja je takođe pretila, u stvari pretio je njen muž govoreći kako će da me bije čim me vidi u gradu. Ne mogu da se složim da se u demokratskom sistemu Srbije ne mogu iznositi lični politički stavovi. Zbog svega ovoga nisam više sposoban da radim u RTV Bor, niti u opštini. Apelujem na dobre ljude u svim strankama da ovo osude i stanu u zaštitu medija.“158

23. jul – Dnevni list Pravda dobio je pretnje elektronskom poštom, sa adrese koja se može identifikovati. U poruci je napisano: „Pička li vam materina

157 „Novinaru pretili smrću“, Kurir, 16. jul 2008, (http://www.vesti.rs/izvor/Novinaru-pretili-smrcu.html)

158 B. Filipović, „Spletkarenje i seks afere“, Glas javnosti, 21. jul 2008, str. 23.  58 | 59

radikalska. Sa vama treba nešto učiniti. Ja se ne krijem, evo vam i moj mo- bilni 063 214 69h, pa se javite da vam se najebem matere, ja i moja ekipa. Obezbedili smo sva udaračka hladna i vatrena sredstva. List vam nije ni za septičku jamu.“ Redakcija Pravde je slučaj prijavila kabinetu predsednika Republike Srbije. 159

24. jul – Tomislav Nikolić – tada potpredsednik Srpske radikalne stranke, a danas predsednik novoosnovane Srpske napredne stranke – dva puta je u roku od dva dana pretio RTS-u. Nikolić je na stranačkoj konferenciji kri- tikovao rad zaposlenih i pozvao ih da se „otvore prema građanima Srbije jer javni servis bar polovinom pripada i onim građanima koji se ne raduju hapšenju Karadžića“. Dodao je i da će radikali u suprotnom učiniti sve da se rad te kuće zaustavi. Nakon što ga je jedan od novinara upitao šta je time hteo da kaže, Nikolić je objasnio: „To neće biti teško, videli ste šta je rađeno Bastilji.“ 160

26. jul – Dnevni list Blic je u kratkom tekstu objavio da je, po nalogu čelnika Skupštine opštine Aleksandrovac, skupštinsko obezbeđenje sprečilo dopi- snika tog lista, kao i novinare lokalne televizije, da uđu u salu i prate rad druge sednice opštinskog parlamenta. 161

[ Avgust ] 18. avgust – Kruševački policajci sprečili su novinara Dragana Ilića, dopi- snika dnevnog lista Press, da snimi saobraćajnu nesreću u kojoj je stradao motociklista. Potom su ga i priveli u stanicu, uz obrazloženje da je spreča- vao vršenje uviđaja. Ilić tvrdi da mu je za vreme saslušanja u policiji po- zlilo, ali da je u bolnicu prevezen tek nekoliko sati kasnije, jer su policajci tražili da mu se uradi alko-test. O samom incidentu, Ilić kaže: „U nedelju oko 20 časova dobio sam informaciju da se u Kruševcu dogodila teška saobraćajna nesreća u kojoj je stradao motociklista. Uzeo sam fotoaparat i odmah otišao na mesto nesreće. Na licu mesta su već bili tridesetak gra- đana i tri saobraćajna policajca. Napravio sam jedan snimak sa daljine od

159 E. P., „Opasne pretnje Haškog lobija“, Pravda, 24. jul 2008, str. 2.

160 „RTS, radikali i ’Bastilja’“ , B92, 25. jul 2008.

161 B. N., „Sramota u Aleksandrovcu“, Blic, 27. jul 2008, str. 4. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

oko 30 metara, sa travnjaka obližnje benzinske pumpe. U tom trenutku ugledao me je Dejan Ivanović, jedan od saobraćajnih policajaca. On je počeo odmah da viče na mene, govorio je da ometam uviđaj i tražio da se udaljim. Objasnio sam mu da sam na zadatku i pokazao mu novinarsku legitimaciju. Rekao mi je: ’Boli me kurac ko si ti.’ Pokušao sam da obja- snim da ja nikoga sa trideset metara udaljenosti ne mogu da ometam. Uneli su mi se u lice, a jedan od njih mi je rekao: ’Tražiš da izgubim posao ovde, jer kad te udarim u jaja, izleteće ti oči.’ Ivan Ivanović mi je skoro pet minuta, do dolaska interventne patrole, pretio da ću ga zapamtiti. In- terventna je stigla za nekoliko minuta uz rotaciju i sirenu kao da hapse opasnog kriminalca.“ 162

18. avgust – Rukovodstvo borske medijske kuće Štampa, radio i film (ŠRIF) obavestilo je javnost da je gradonačelnik Bora, Branislav Rankić, upao u prostorije te kuće u pijanom stanju, te da je vređao rukovodstvo i pretio mu. Objavljeno je i da je o tome obaveštena borska policija, kao i da će ŠRIF podneti krivičnu prijavu protiv gradonačelnika. Povodom incidenta se oglasio i gradonačelnik Rankić, koji je demantovao pomenute navode, rekavši da je jedino tačno to da je bio u Radio Boru. On tvrdi da je tamo, potpuno trezan, popio kafu sa novinarima. Ceo događaj je nazvao „reži- jom“ rukovodstva ŠRIF-a sa ciljem njegove kompromitacije, a u sklopu kampanje koja se vodi protiv njega kako bi bio smenjen sa svoje funkci- je.163

24. avgust – Direktorka RTV Panon iz Subotice, Ildiko Arpaši, dobila je na službeni mobilni telefon preteću SMS-poruku u kojoj je pisalo: „Kurvo mađarska podmetnuli smo eksplozivnu napravu, tempiranu u 14 sati i 23 minuta u prostorije tvog jebenog radija, Vojna pošta General Ratko Mla- dić, 1991, Knin.“ Subotička policija je odmah obaveštena o pretnji, da bi ubrzo potom utvrdila da je reč o lažnoj dojavi.164

162 E. P., „Kruševački policajci maltretirali dopisnika Pressa“, Press, 19. avgust 2008, str. 11.

163 S. Todorović, „Napad na novinare ili politički obračun“, Politika, 19. avgust, str. A8.

164 Z. R., „Pretnje direktorici RTV-a Panon Ildiko Arpaši”, Dnevnik, 25. avgust 2008, str. 8.  60 | 61

[ Septembar ] 22. septembar – Dopisnica novinske agencije BETA iz Zrenjanina, Ljiljana Stupar, dobila je pretnje od nepoznatog muškarca koji joj je rekao kako „ima fotografiju njene ćerke“ i da zbog toga „ne treba ponovo da gura nos u svari u kojima joj nije mesto“. Slične pretnje novinarki su stizale i prethodne godine, a povodom tekstova koje je pisala o spornim privatiza- cijama i koji su objavljivani u lokalnoj štampi.165 Nakon tri dana, policija je otkrila osobu koja je pretila Ljiljani Stupar. Reč je o Ljubiši K. (30) iz Zrenjanina, protiv koga je podneta krivična prijava zbog ugrožavanja si- gurnosti.166

25. septembar – Novinar Večernjih novosti, Milan Ivetić, vređao je i fizički pretio Miomirki Mili Melank, novinarki Kikindskih i Dnevnika. Incident se desio u kikindskom hotelu „Narvik“, gde je obnovljeni odbor SRS-a držao konferenciju za medije. O incidentu je novinarka Melank dala sle- deću izjavu: „Snimila sam promovisanu predsednicu Opštinskog odbora Sonju Prekajski-Trumbetašev, pored koje je sedeo Ivetić. On je shvatio da fotografišem njega, pa je počeo da psuje i vređa. Iako ne komuniciramo već više godina, posebno nakon njegovih poslednjih pretnji meni pre dve godine, Ivetić mi se obratio histeričnim tonom, rekavši da će mi ’odšarafiti glavu’ ako slučajno objavimo njegovu sliku u novinama. Dodao je i još koju gadnu reč, ja sam pokušala da mu objasnim da je osoba kraj njega predmet moje pažnje, a ne on, i udaljila se. I ljudi oko mene, koji su već počeli da ustaju, primetili su da je Ivetić besan, pa su ga smirivali. Neki mi- nut kasnije, dok sam pakovala fotoaparat, Ivetić je prišao ponovo preteći. Psovao mi je roditelje, govorio da me on učio novinarstvu i da sam loš đak, zatim da sam krmača i kobila i sijaset drugih uvreda kojih se baš ne mogu setiti. Novinari oko mene su bili zabezeknuti, a neki radikali govorili su mu da se smiri.“167

165 „Dopisnici Bete upućene ozbiljne pretnje“, Blic, 23. septembar 2008 (http://www.blic.co.yu/hronika.php?id=58044).

166 „Policija otkrila ko je pretio dopisnici agencije BETA“, Saopštenje Novinske agencije BETA, 25. septembar 2008 (Dokumentacija OEBS-a).

167 E. K., „Ima da ti odšarafim glavu“, Dnevnik, 26. septembar 2008, str. 6. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

[ Oktobar ] 01. oktobar – Predsednik Aktiva novinara Politike, Ljubodrag Stojadinović, dobio je otkaz od direktora (u ostavci) te novinske kuće, Srđana Janićijevi- ća. Stojadinović smatra da se radi o „meri odmazde“ zbog njegovih istupa u javnosti u kojima je govorio o lošem stanju unutar ove medijske kuće. NUNS je u saopštenju za javnost osudio ovakav potez, protestujući zbog „odmazde koju poslovodstvo Politike preduzima prema novinarima tog lista“. U saopštenju NUNS-a se dodaje: „NUNS smatra da je ovaj potez nemoralan i neodrživ, jer je reč o osveti ljudi koji su prinuđeni da odu sa kormila ove medijske kompanije“. Na kraju, NUNS je ocenio i da „Stojadi- nović svojim izjavama nije naškodio ugledu svog lista jer je s pravom uka- zivao na probleme i lošu klimu, za koje je pre svega odgovorno odlazeće rukovodstvo Politike“. 168

02. oktobar – Ispred prostorija novinske agencija BETA, pripadnici pokre- ta „1389“ i organizacije „Obraz“, koji su svakodnevno demonstrirali zbog hapšenja haškog optuženika Radovana Karadžića, ostavili su maketu ku- kastog krsta. U zvaničnim dokumentima ovih organizacija kaže se da „Je- vreji, homoseksualci i Vatikan vladaju svetom“. 169

05. oktobar – Novinaru iz Požarevca, Igoru Apostoloviću, stigle su pretnje preko veb-sajta Facebook. Povod je bio novinski članak koji je u Braničevu (dodatku lista Danas) objavljen pod naslovom „Pozovi stranku radi posla“, i u kojem se Apostolović bavio ulogom političkih stranaka pri zapošljava- nja, pri čemu je akcenat stavio na lokalnu samoupravu u Požarevcu, gde je na vlasti koalicija SRS-SPS-DSS. Apostolović je o incidentu dao sledeću izjavu: „Pomenuti članak podigao je veliku prašinu, a kao vrhunac, preko Fejsbuka stigle su mi pretnje od I. K., sina člana DSS-a, novozaposlenog kadra u Centru za kulturu. On se sam prepoznao u mom članku, iako ni- sam pominjao konkretna imena. Među pretnjama bile su poruke sledeće sadržine: ’Mali čoveče, kad ćeš da svratiš do mene da ti narežem Madden 08?’, ’A, ima i moj ćale da te pita nešto’, ’Priča je baš protiv mog ćaleta. A, ako je protiv njega onda je i protiv mene. Videćemo se na ulici’, ’Da

168 „Ljubodrag Stojadinović dobio otkaz“, B92, 2. oktobar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=10&dd=02&nav_id=321652).

169 „Kukasti krstovi“, Danas, 3. oktobar 2008, str. 11.  62 | 63

li se ti drogiraš, kao što kažu?’, ’Znaš li šta sam ti rekao – neka ti je Bog u pomoći’.“170

23. oktobar – Olja Bećković, urednica i voditeljka emisije Utisak nedelje, koja se emituje na televiziji B92, dobila je preko veb-sajta Facebook seriju vul- garnih uvreda i ozbiljnih pretnji, među kojima i pretnju smrću. U saop- štenju koje je objavila RTV B92, navodi se da su pretnje posledica objav- ljivanja navodne prepiske u kojoj je neko ko se lažno potpisao kao Olja Bećković vređao šesnaestogodišnju devojčicu koja je oformila Facebook- grupu protiv predsednika Republike, Borisa Tadića. Redakcija B92 smatra da je ovaj internet-falsifikat najverovatnije i podmetnut sa namerom da se iskoristi kao povod za dodatnu hajku na novinarku Bećković.171

24. oktobar – Kompanija „Hemofarm“ zabranila je novinarima Televizi- je Panonija i Televizije TNT, Branislavu Lazinu i Stefanu Cvetkoviću, da izveštavaju o poseti predsednika Izvršnog veća Vojvodine Bojana Pajtića toj kompaniji. Na ulazu u krug kompanije, obezbeđenje im je reklo da ne mogu unutra. Saznavši naknadno za incident, Bojan Pajtić je rekao kako bi – da je na vreme bio obavešten o tome – u znak protesta napustio mesto događaja, a iz istog razloga je odložio posetu Beloj Crkvi.172

[ Novembar ] 04. novembar – Vlasnik lokalnog nedeljnika Vranjske, Vukašin Obradović, dobio je nekoliko anonimnih pretnji smrću. U izjavi koju je dao pred- stavnicima OEBS-a, Obradović je naglasio da pretnje i pritiske kojima je izložen u poslednje vreme shvata kao posledicu rada Novina Vranjskih i tekstova o kriminalnim strukturama u Vranju. Jedna politička partija je, nakon teksta u kojem se njeno delovanje povezuje sa aktivnostima lokal- nog podzemlja, protiv Obradovića podnela tužbu lokalnom sudu, tražeći višemilionsku dinarsku odštetu. Ubrzo su Obradoviću, iz izvora bliskih podzemlju, počeli da stižu saveti kako bi trebalo da se „pripazi“, kao i te-

170 Tanja Vasić, „Fejsbuk u policiji“ , Gazeta, 6. oktobar 2008, str. 9.

171 „Protest zbog pretnji Olji Bečković na Fejsbuku“, Blic, 24. oktobar 2008 (http://www.blic.co.yu/drustvo.php?id=62315).

172 „Skandalozan postupak ’Hemofarma’“ , Press, 25. oktobar 2008, str. 8. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

lefonski pozivi u kojima su mu nepoznata lica pretila da će mu „polomiti noge ukoliko nastavi da piše o tim temama“. Obradović je kao najozbilj- niju pretnju shvatio poruku koja mu je poslata preko njegove maloletne ćerke. Naime, početkom novembra, nepoznate osobe su presrele njegovu ćerku na povratku iz škole i rekle joj: „Roknuće ti tatu za 10 dana.“ Nakon ovoga, Obradoviću je Policijska uprava u Vranju dodelila obezbeđenje, koje nadzire kuću u kojoj živi sa porodicom i redakciju Vranjskih.173

17. novembar – Prema izjavama novinara RTV Diskos iz Aleksandrovca – jedine koja je u tom regionu od Republičke radiodifuzne agencije dobila dozvolu za emitovanje – čelnici opštine pokušali su da im sruše predajnik. Novinari ove medijske kuće – Goran Gašić, Vesna Dobrosavljević i Milo- rad Ćoćić – tvrde da ovaj incident predstavlja pritisak zbog objektivnog izveštavanja, te da su im načelnica opštinske uprave (Dobrila Vukojević), načelnik finansija Skupštine opštine (Vojislav Pešterac) i direktor opštin- skog Komunalnog preduzeća (Milutin Radičević) poslali pisma u kojima kažu da su zaposleni u RTV Diskos „neprijateljski nastrojeni prema op- štinskim čelnicima, da gaje patološku mržnju prema njima i da su tenden- ciozni“. O samom incidentu rečeno je to da su čelnici opštine poslali ljude i mehanizaciju u Stanjevačku poljanu, gde se ipak odustalo od rušenja pre- dajnika, pošto su kamere RTV Diskos sve vreme snimale taj događaj. 174

26. novembar – Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije javno je kritikovalo urednika televizije Kuršumlija Slavka Savića zbog fizičkih pretnji novinar- ki agencije Beta i RTV B92 Ljiljani Danilović. U saopštenju NUNS-a kaže se da je Savićuputio niz pretnji novinarki i da je pominjao da će koristiti bezbol palicu. 175

30. novembar – U pisanoj izjavi dostavljenoj OEBS-u, novinari RTV Enigma iz Prijepolja tvrde da su im ove godine u najmanje pet navrata – zbog

173 Iz izjave koju je Vukašin Obradović predstavnicima OEBS-a dao 18. novembra 2008 (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

174 „Čelnici opštine pokušali da sruše TV predajnik“, Blic, 18. novembar 2008 (http://www.mediacenter.org.yu/code/navigate.asp?Id=6&eventId=44009).

175 NUNS osuđuje pretnje novinarki B92, B92, 26. novembar 2008. godine, pogledati veb stranicu: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=11&dd=26&nav_id=330744  64 | 65

„iznošenja istinitih podataka o malverzacijama predsednika Skupštine opštine Prijepolje, Dragana Svičevića“ – stizale telefonske pretnje.176

[ Decembar ] 02. decembar – Dnevni list Press objavio je vest da je lider političke partije Nova Srbija i bivši ministar za kapitalne investicije izvređao novinarku tog lista dok je pokušavala da mu uzme izjavu o navodnoj saobraćajnoj nesreći u kojoj je Ilić učestvovao. Na pitanje novinarke da li će nadokna- diti štetu taksisti, po pisanju Press-a, Ilić je počeo da viče: „Ma kakva, bre, šteta? Moje vozilo nije oštećeno! Šta mene briga za tamo nekog kretena! Jeste, zamenićemo i vozila za nadoknadu štete! Ma daću mu džip! Skinite mi se više! Pun mi je klinac!“. 177

08. decembar – Predsednik opštine Aleksandrovac Jugoslav Stajkovac napao je kamermana televizije Diskos Igora Mladenovića dok je ovaj pokušavao da snimi sastanak Sindikata opštinskog komunalnog preduzeća. Milano- vić je dao sledeću izjavu o incidentu: „Stajkovac je došao na sastanak Sin- dikata opštinskog Komunalnog preduzeća i pred više od stotinu radnika povišenim tonom mi naredio da isključim kameru i da odmah napustim prostoriju. Kako sam to odbio, on je desnom rukom odgurnuo objektiv i zapretio da će mi razbiti kameru ako nastavim da ga snimam. U tom trenutku reagovao je Boško Pavlović, predsednik Sindikata Komunalnog preduzeća, koji je objasnio Stajkovcu da je on pozvao novinare. Onda je Stajkovac ljutito rekao da se Pavlović opredeli. Nakon toga je napustio sastanak“.178

09. decembar – Dragan Marinković novinar i voditelj emisija „Operacija tri- jumf “ koje se emituju na TV B92 uputio je javno tokom jedne od emisija pretnje novinarki lista Puls Milici Crnogorac. Marinković je tada rekao: „Iskoristiću ovu priliku da pozdravim Milicu Crnogorac, neko novinar-

176 Iz pisane izjave novinara RTV Enigma (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

177 „Velja Ilić izvređao novinarku Press-a“, Press, 03. decembar 2008. godine, strana 2, autor: J. Velinović

178 „Predsednik opštine napao kamermana“, Blic, 09. decembar 2008, (http://www.unsonline.org/sr-Latn-CS/content/vesti/2342/predsednik-op%C5%A1tine-napao- kamermana.xhtml) Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

sko piskaralo koje sebi daje za pravo da pljuje po meni i kolegama mo- jim. Slušaj me Milice, bavi se sobom ili ćeš završiti kao što je završila i perjanica srpskog novinarstva Petar Luković“. Milica Crnogarac je nakon incidenta dala sledeću izjavu: „Samo se u Srbiji novinarima može pretiti i uživo i u repriznom terminu, kao što je to uradio Dragan Marinković u svojoj emisiji na televiziji B92, u subotu i nedelju. Otvorenje pretnje ko- je mi je Marinković uputio javno i nedvosmisleno, čitajući ih sa unapred pripremljenog papira, dovoljno govore o ozbiljnosti situacije u kojoj sam se našla. Marinković mi je javno poručio, pred više miliona gledalaca, da „ću proći kao Petar Luković”. A kako je to prošao novinar Luković? Pa, pre nekoliko godina on je zbog jednog teksta bio pretučen“.179

179 “Maca preti novinarki Pulsa”, 24 sata, 10. decembar 2008. godine, strana 16, autor: D. Farkaš  66 | 67

C. SUDSKE PRESUDE IZREČENE NOVINARIMA

[ Januar ] 24. januar – Drugi opštinski sud u Beogradu doneo je presudu protiv glav- nog i odgovornog urednika lista Pravda, Predraga Popovića, i izdavača tog lista, kojom ih je osudio da zbog klevete plate Vladimiru Popoviću 250.000 dinara i da nadoknade sudske troškove u iznosu od 68.000 dinara. Pod pretnjom plaćanja nove novčane kazne, sud im je zabranio da ubudu- će povređuju prava i ličnost Popovića. Tužba je podneta zbog teksta pod naslovom „Politički sumrak Bebe Popovića i Čede Jovanovića – čeka ih zatvor“, koji je objavljen u Pravdi, 20. juna 2007. godine. 180

[ Mart ] 08. mart – Opštinski sud u Kikindi doneo je presudu kojom je sa 10.000 di- nara kaznio Sonju Trumbetašev-Prekajski, glavnu i odgovornu urednicu Kikindskih novina. Nju je tužila Mila Melank iz JP „Informativni centar Kikinda“, a zbog teksta pod naslovom „Milino isterivanje veštica“, u kojem se, između ostalog, kaže i da su direktorka Mila Melank, glavna i odgo- vorna urednica Gordana Bulatović, te urednik novina Željko Bodrožić – „konfliktne osobe, u neprestanom sudaru sa okolinom i zakonom“ i „da su druga neka vremena pale bi bukagije, tucao bi se kamen, a bogami palila bi se i lomača“.181

[ Maj ] 09. maj – Novinara užičkog lista Pečat, Uglješu Mrdića, Okružni sud u Užicu osudio je na novčanu kaznu od 30.000 dinara, zbog klevete na račun sme-

180 „Pravda da plati odštetu Popoviću“, B92, 25. januar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=01&dd=25&nav_id=282080).

181 E. K., „Opštinski sud kaznio urednicu nekadašnjih opštinskih novina“, Dnevnik, 8. mart 2008, str. 38 (http://www.kikinda.cc/moduli.php?naziv=prilozi&file=clanak&sid=2796). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

njenog načelnika OUP Priboj Dragana Ješića. Udruženje novinara Srbije prenelo je saopštenje redakcije lista Pečat, u kojem se kaže: „Redakcija lista Pečat apeluje na sve državne organe i institucije, kao i na sva novinarska udruženja u Srbiji, da spreče nečasne radnje u srpskom pravosuđu, te da ne dozvole da ispaštaju oni novinari koji radeći profesionalno svoj posao nužno dolaze na udar pojedinih državnih funkcionera koji smatraju da je njihov rad zabranjeno komentarisati.“ 182

20. maj – Nevenu Stojčević, nekadašnju urednicu ugašenog dnevnog lista Internacional, Četvrti opštinski sud u Beogradu kaznio je sa 50.000 di- nara zbog klevete iznesene u tekstovima u kojima se tvrdilo da su Veselin Šljivančanin i Dragoljub Milanović uhapšeni po nalogu Vladimira Bebe Popovića. 183

[ Jul ] 01. jul – Okružni sud u Beogradu presudio je da novinar Dragan Stojković plati 350.000 dinara obeštećenja potpredsedniku Srpske radikalne stranke, Draganu Todoroviću, zbog nanetog duševnog bola, a 145.000 dinara na ime sudskih troškova. Stojković je naneo duševni bol Todoroviću tekstom u Hronici za Zemun iz septembra 2002. godine, koji je bio posvećen oti- manju televizijske kamere ekipi TV Mreža u junu 2000, za šta je optužen Branislav Gavrilović, tadašnji telohranitelj Dragana Todorovića. Stojković je Todorovića u tom tekstu nazvao „verovatnim nalogodavcem krađe“. 184

[ Oktobar ] 02. oktobar – Okružni sud u Kragujevcu doneo je presudu kojom je nedelj- nik Svetlost kaznio zbog teksta koji je objavljen u rubrici „Pisma čitalaca“, i u kojem su, po mišljenju suda, povređeni ugled, čast i dostojanstvo sut- kinje ovog Okružnog suda, Simonide Miloradović. 185

182 „Novinar Mrdić osuđen za klevetu“, Glas javnosti, 7. jun 2008, str. 10

183 „Popoviću spor protiv Internacionala”, B92, 21. maj 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=05&dd=20&nav_id=299478).

184 „Todoroviću 350.000 za duševni bol“, Press, 2. jul 2008, str. 4.

185 „Kažnjeni zbog pisma čitaoca“, B92, 3. oktobar 2008.  68 | 69

02. oktobar – Ilija Dimitrijević, glavni i odgovorni urednik požarevačkog privatnog nedeljnika Reč naroda, osuđen je presudom Prvog opštinskog suda u Požarevcu na novčanu kaznu od 20.000 dinara zbog krivičnog dela klevete. Ukoliko novčanu kaznu ne plati u zakonskom roku, ona će biti promenjena u kaznu zatvora u trajanju od 20 dana. Pored toga, Dimitrije- vić će morati da plati i sudske troškove u iznosu od 25.400 dinara. Proces protiv Dimitrijevića se vodio zbog serije tekstova koji su u nedeljniku Reč naroda objavljivani o Momčilu Veljkoviću, kordonatoru PNP Otpor i Mi- letu Veljkoviću, novinaru iz ovog grada.186

29. oktobar – Opštinski sud u Srermskoj Mitrovici osudio je Hanibala Kovača, novinara iz Šapca, na novčanu kaznu od 18.000 dinara zbog dve uvrede, a novčana kazna mu je zamenjena kaznom zatvora u trajanju od tri meseca zbog nemogućnosti prinudne naplate. U vreme kada je kažnjen, Kovač je za lokalne novine pisao o nepotizmu u šabačkim sudovima.187

186 D. Novković, „Urednik osuđen zbog klevete“, Glas javnosti, 3. oktobar 2008, str. 21.

187„Osuđen u procesu za koji nije znao“, B92, 29. oktobar 2008 (http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=10&dd=29&nav_id=325886). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine  70 | 71

VI | Medijska prava i slobode u Srbiji Ovaj deo istraživanja OEBS je sproveo u saradnji sa Institutom. Kao osnova je poslužio upitnik, koji je bio poslat na adrese 439 medija u Srbiji i na koji je odgovorilo 306 urednika. Osnovni cilj istraživanja, koje je zamišljeno kao prva etapa sistematskog pra- ćenja kršenja medijskih sloboda i prava, bio je da se utvrde realne dimenzije ugrožavanja medijskih sloboda i prava u Srbiji tokom 2008. godine, odnosno da se ispitaju raširenost, oblici, intenzitet i nosioci pritisaka, napada i pretnji upućenih medijima i novinarima. Istraživanje se ticalo i percepcije ugroženih medijskih urednika i novinara o razlozima ugrožavanja medijskih sloboda i prava; eventualnih posledica pomenutih pritisaka, napada i pretnji; te mogu- ćih mera za što bolju zaštitu medijskih sloboda u budućnosti. Poseban cilj istraživanja je bio da se na osnovu uvida u raspoložive podatke o ugrožavanju medijskih sloboda i prava u Srbiji u dva perioda 2008. godine (do 17. februara tj. momenta proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova, i od tada do momenta ispitivanja), kao i u celoj 2007. godini kao kontrolnom vremen- skom periodu, utvrdi da li je kosovska kriza dovela do pojačanog ugrožavanja medijskih sloboda i prava u Srbiji, ili se radilo o relativno konstantnim raz- merama ugrožavanja. Pod medijskim slobodama i pravima podrazumevani su: sloboda izražavanja mišljenja; sloboda prikupljanja, objavljivanja i širenja informacija; sloboda protoka informacija i otvorenost medija za različita mišljenja; sloboda ure- đivačke politike i nezavisnost medija; pravo pristupa informacijama; pravo kontrole i kritike vlasti i javnih institucija; kao i druga profesionalna prava novinara koja ne ugrožavaju prava i ugled drugih, opštu bezbednost i javni red. Pod napadom na medije i novinare podrazumevan je bilo koji oblik krše- nja medijskih prava i sloboda uz upotrebu sile, pretnje ili različitih vrsta priti- Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

saka, nezavisno od toga da li su oni bili motivisani konkretnim izveštavanjem ili samom činjenicom da se radi o medijima i novinarima.

Metod Istraživanje je obavljeno anketiranjem dve osnovne grupe ispitanika – glav- nih urednika informativnih medija u Srbiji i medijskih profesionalaca koji su bili fizički napadnuti ili izloženi pretnjama zbog izveštavanja o događajima u vezi sa proglašavanjem nezavisnosti Kosova u februaru 2008. godine. Pod informativnim medijima podrazumevani su: novinske agencije; dnevna, nedeljna i druga periodična informativna štampa; te radio i TV-stanice, tj. programi sa značajnom sopstvenom informativnom produkcijom i sedištem u Srbiji. A među medijske profesionalce svrstani su novinari, fotoreporteri, snimatelji ili drugi članovi ekipa za izveštavanje sa terena. U istraživanju su korišćena dva upitnika: jedan je bio namenjen rukovodećim ljudima u medijima i njime su prikupljani opšti podaci o mediju, ocene o slobodi medija i konkretnim slučajevima kršenja medijskih sloboda i prava; a drugi, kraći, bio je namenjen ugroženim medijskim profesionalcima, i glavni su mu deo bila pitanja o okolnostima napada i pretnji.

Uzorak Budući da u Srbiji ne postoji zvanični registar medija, odabir onih čiji su rukovodioci bili obuhvaćeni istraživanjem načinjen je na osnovu podataka o medijima dostupnih iz nekoliko izvora, a pre svega iz medijskih adresara profesionalnih udruženja, organizacija i medija – Udruženja novinara Srbije, Nezavisnog udruženja novinara Srbije, Nezavisnog udruženja novinara Voj- vodine, ANEM-a, Lokal Pressa, Medija centra iz Beograda i Medijs centra iz Vranja, Centra za profesionalizaciju medija, Novosadske novinarske škole, RTV B92, Balkanske istraživačke mreže, spiska radio i TV-stanica kojima je Republička radiodifuzna agencija dodelila lokalne, regionalne ili nacionalne frekvencije, kao i spiskova medija na raznovrsnim internet-sajtovima. Kom- binacijom podataka napravljen je preliminarni spisak od 652 novinske, radij- ske, televizijske i radio-televizijske kuće.  72 | 73

U njemu nisu posebno registrovani internet-mediji – jer ih ni medijske kuće koje ih imaju ne tretiraju kao zasebne, jer nije bilo dovoljno podataka o njima, i jer se njihova produkcija razlikuje od uobičajene informativne produkcije medija koji su bili glavni predmet istraživanja. Iz spiska su eliminisani mediji koji nisu bili relevantni za ciljeve istraživanja – ilustrovano-zabavna i speci- jalizovana štampa (dečja, ženska, kompjuterska itd), verski mediji, dominan- tno zabavni elektronski mediji i nepostojeći, odnosno mediji koji su prema saznanju samih istraživača prestali da postoje (npr. dnevni listovi Nacional i Balkan, nedeljnici Reporter, Evropa, radio-stanice Radio Jat, Radio Kontakt, Radio Pingvin, Radio SKC itd). Ovako dobijeni spisak je još uvek bio nepotpun i nekredibilan. Radi kontakta sa ispitanicima, bili su potrebni podaci o nazivu medija, njegovom sedištu, vr- sti, poštanskoj i elektronskoj adresi, broju telefona i imenu glavnog urednika. U dobijenom spisku je nedostajao niz podataka, a oni koji su postojali u veli- koj meri su se pokazali kao netačni, odnosno zastareli. U njemu, takođe, nije bilo moguće razlikovati aktivne od nepostojećih ili još neaktiviranih radio i TV-stanica. Naime, iz spiska stanica koje su dobile frekvenciju, tj. dozvolu za emitovanje nije bilo moguće razaznati koje su tek u osnivanju i još nisu po- čele da rade. Istovremeno se, bez konkretne provere, nije moglo utvrditi koje radio i TV-stanice još uvek funkcionišu iako nisu dobile dozvole – a i one su, budući aktivne do trenutka istraživanja, bile uključene u relevantne medije. Dodatni problem je predstavljalo razlikovanje između spiska medija i spiska glavnih urednika, tj. ispitanika. Naime, pošlo se od definicije da medij čini za- seban radijski ili televizijski program (Prvi i Drugi program Radio Beograda tretirani su kao različiti mediji), pa je prvobitna namera istraživanja bila da se među ispitanike odvojeno uključe i glavni urednici radija i televizije iz zajed- ničkih radio-televizijskog emitera. Neki od tih emitera zaista imaju posebne urednike radio i TV-programa, dok u drugima isto lice vrši obe funkcije. U takvim slučajevima, dotični je medij tretiran kao jedinstven subjekt, i to kao posebna vrsta (RTV-emiter). Nakon provere postojećih i prikupljanja novih podataka, iz spiska medija su isključeni i oni za koje se saznalo da više ne funkcionišu, da još nisu aktivni, kao i oni za koje je utrvrđeno da nemaju relevantnu sopstvenu informativ- nu produkciju, tj. da je njihov program uglavnom komercijalno-zabavan. U drugom krugu eliminacije su isključeni i mediji sa Kosova, jer nije postojao njihov poptun spisak, jer su za mnoge nedostajali osnovni podaci, i jer se Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

došlo do zaključka da su problemi ovih medija drugačiji od problema većine medija u Srbiji, pa bi njihovo uključivanje u istraživanje dalo drugačiju uku- pnu sliku. Konačan spisak je sadržao 439 medija: 97 novina, 205 radio i 37 TV-stanica. Da su svi RTV-emiteri imali posebne glavne urednike za radio i TV-program, ciljani bi uzorak imao 517 urednika. U istraživanju je sudelovalo 306 medijskih urednika. Prvobitno je prikupljeno 328 popunjenih upitnika, ali su 22 eliminisana jer nisu ispunjavali kriterijume da budu uvršćeni u uzorak (medij bez informativnog programa, neodgovara- jući profesionalni rang ispitanika, dupliranje medija, itd). Zbog manjka verodostojnih podataka o aktivnim informativnim medijima u Srbiji, kao i zbog razlike između podataka o broju medija i broju glavnih urednika, teško je proceniti obuhvat anketiranih u odnosu na celokupnu po- pulaciju. U odnosu na konačni spisak od 439 medija, uzorkom je obuhvaćeno 69,7%, a u odnosu na potencijalnih 517 urednika – 59,2%. Uzorak je zadovoljavajuće reprezentativan po nekoliko aspekata. Prema tipu medija, uzorak čini 41,5% urednika radio-stanica, 22,2% urednika TV-stani- ca, 11,4% urednika RTV-emitera, 13,1% urednika nedeljne, 6,2% urednika druge periodične, 3,9% urednika dnevne štampe i 1,3% urednika informa- tivnih agencija. S obzirom na ciljnu grupu, 49% anketiranih su urednici lokalnih medija, 36,6% urednici regionalnih, a 13,1% urednici nacionalnih medija. Važno je napomenuti da je klasifikacija medija na lokalne, regionalne i nacionalne na- pravljena prema tvrdnjama glavnih urednika o ciljnoj grupi njihovih medija. Anketirani glavni urednici predstavljaju medije iz 93 različita mesta iz svih regiona u Srbiji. Među njima, 49,3% su urednici medija iz Centralne Srbije, 37,6% iz Vojvodine, a 13,1% iz Beograda. Uprkos mnogobrojnim pokušajima, uzorak nije obuhvatio nekoliko velikih beogradskih medija (Politika, Večernje novosti, Kurir, Glas javnosti, TV Pink, TV Foks, Radio Fokus, Radio S), usled nekooperativnosti njihovih glavnih urednika. U uzorku je zastupljeno 96% medija iz gradova, a 4% iz seoskih naselja. U pogledu godine osnivanja medija, u uzorku su se našli urednici iz medija različite „starosti“ – 28,1% iz medija osnovanih pre 1990. godine, 44,4% iz medija koji su počeli da rade u periodu između 1990. i 2000. godine, te 24,9% iz medija osnovanih nakon toga.  74 | 75

Upitnik je bio namenjen pre svega glavnim urednicima medija, kao pred- stavnicima medijskog kadra koji koristi medijske slobode i ima profesionalne interese (za razliku od direktora, koji su deo poslovodnog kadra). Kao re- prezentativni zastupnici rukovodećeg medijskog kadra tretirani su i zame- nici, tj. pomoćnici glavnih urednika, kao i urednici informativnog programa u elektronskim medijima. Najveći deo ispitanika zaista jesu glavni urednici (49,7%), kao i glavni urednici koji su istovremeno i direktori (14,4%), dok su u 1,3% slučajeva ispitanici bili osobe koje su istovremeno i vlasnici, direktori i glavni urednici. Uzorak anketiranih dodatno čini 5,6% zamenika glavnog urednika, 4,6% urednika informativnog programa i 12,7% direktora medija. U 11,4% upitnika nema podataka o funkciji lica koje ga je popunjavalo, ali budući da su oni adresovani na ime glavnog urednika, realno je pretpostaviti da su ih popunjavali oni sami ili njima bliski saradnici. Utvrđivanje drugog osnovnog skupa – ugrožavanih novinara ili drugih me- dijskih radnika – obavljeno je takođe iz više izvora: iz medijskih informacija o napadima, podataka koje o tome prikupljaju profesionalna udruženja, kao i iz odgovora medijskih urednika. Nakon što su identifikovani novinari ili me- diji čiji su novinari bili fizički ili verbalno napadnuti, njima je direktno ili uz posredovanje glavnih urednika upućen poseban upitnik. Jedan broj napadnu- tih nije bio spreman da odgovori na pitanja, objašnjavajući to traumatičnim iskustvom kojega nisu želeli da se sećaju.

Tehnike i tok istraživanja

Složenost i osetljivost analizirane teme i specifična ciljna grupa – te, posle- dično, teškoće dolaska do ispitanika – uslovile su upotrebu nekoliko različitih istraživačkih tehnika i postojanje nekoliko faza istraživanja. Proces prikupljanja podataka je u prvoj fazi realizovan e-mail-anketom. Upit- nici su u elektronskom obliku slati na dostupne elektronske adrese medija, na lično ime glavnih urednika (ili na njihove lične adrese, ukoliko su bile po- znate), uz propratno pismo sa molbom za učestvovanje u istraživanju, gde su objašnjeni predmet i cilj istraživanja, procedura popunjavanja upitnika i sla- nja odgovora na adresu Instituta. Upitnici i propratna pisma poslati su na oko 350 različitih adresa u nekoliko „talasa“ (najmanje tri puta na svaku adresu). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Zbog nekompletnosti i neažurnosti dostupnih podataka (nepostojeće adrese, netačne adrese, nevažeće adrese, adrese koje se više ne koriste ili se koriste retko, adrese koje koriste marketing-odeljenja medija a ne novinari, netačni podaci o imenu glavnog urednika, itd), ali i niske stope odziva urednika koji su ovim putem dobili upitnik (kao odgovor na prvi talas slanja upitnika sti- gla su 54 odgovora), u drugoj fazi su mediji kontaktirani telefonskim putem. U kontaktu sa rukovodiocima medija ili sa članovima redakcije ispitanici su ponovo zamoljeni da učestvuju u istraživanju, a istovremeno su dopunjeni podaci o medijima i glavnim urednicima i sa njima je dogovarano da li žele da im se upitnik pošalje elektronskim ili nekim drugim putem (poštom, fak- som). Urednicima o kojima nisu postojali nikakvi podaci (osim poštanske adrese), upitnik je poslat poštom. U direktnim razgovorima, potencijalni ispitanici su u ogromnoj većini iska- zali veoma pozitivnu reakciju na ciljeve istraživanja. Direktno odbijanje uče- stvovanja se dogodilo samo u tri slučaja. Urednicima je ponuđena mogućnost da upitnik popunjavaju anonimno, tj. bez navođenja imena medija ili njego- vog sedišta, ali se samo 16 glavnih urednika (5%) uzdržalo od iznošenja tih podataka. Ispitanici su se, međutim, često žalili na prezauzetost ili tražili po- meranje roka za slanje odgovora. Treba istaći da je istraživanje obavljeno uoči održavanja izbora na nekoliko nivoa (dakle, u vreme kada su profesionalne obaveze glavnih urednika bile veće no obično), kao i da su tim periodom bila obuhvaćena dva velika praznika (nekoliko neradnih dana povodom Uskrsa i povodom Prvog maja). Nakon telefonskih razgovora, broj odgovora se pove- ćao, ali je još uvek bio nedovoljan da bi činio reprezentativan uzorak. Stoga je CPIJM pristupio trećoj fazi istraživanja – angažovanju terenskih saradnika, kako bi se kontaktirali urednici onih medija sa kojima prethodno nije uspo- stavljen nikakav kontakt (jer nije bilo dostupnih podataka), kao i one koji su obećali učešće u anketi, ali nisu poslali odgovore. Terenski saradnici su intervjue sa glavnim urednicima obavljali face to face, ili su im dostavljali od- štampane upitnike koje su oni sami popunjavali. Na ovaj način je obezbeđeno učešće polovine (164) anketiranih glavnih urednika. Podaci su prikupljani u periodu od 4. aprila do 19. maja 2008. godine. Od popunjenih upitnika, 40% je dobijeno putem elektronske pošte, 50% uz pomoć terenskih saradnika, 5% preko faksa i 5% poštanskim putem. Prikupljeni upitnici su numerisani, kodirani i uneseni u statistički program, nakon čega je usledila procentna i analiza tabela kontingencije.  76 | 77

A. PERCEPCIJA OPŠTEG STANJA MEDIJSKIH PRAVA I SLOBODA

Opšta ocena stanja

Većina rukovodećih ljudi u medijima negativno ocenjuje stanje medijskih sloboda i prava u Srbiji danas: 85% glavnih urednika smatra da je raširenost napada na medije veoma ozbiljan (32%) ili prilično ozbiljan problem (53%) srpskog društva. Tek svaki deseti anketirani misli da postojeći pritisci, pretnje i fizički napadi nisu opterećujuće pitanje za društvo u celini.

sloboda medija kao društveno pitanje

Saglasnost o napadima na medije kao ozbiljnom društvenom problemu postoji među svim urednicima, bez obzira na tip medija, ciljnu publiku, regionalno sedište ili vreme osnivanja. Upadljivije razlike u oceni značaja ovog problema postoje samo u vezi sa praktičnim iskustvom napada na medije. Od urednika koji su iskusili ograničenja profesionalnih sloboda, samo 2,5% njih je smatralo da današnji stepen ugroženosti slobode medija nije ozbiljan problem za druš- tvo, dok je isto mišljenje imalo 18% urednika koji to nisu iskusili. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Ostvarivanje medijskih sloboda

Po mišljenju medijskih čelnika, glavni problem slobode medija odnosi se na njeno ostvarivanje u praksi, a ne toliko na zakonske i institucionalne garancije medijskih sloboda i prava.

Dve trećine anketiranih (65%) ima negativan stav o ostvarivanju medijskih sloboda i prava. Većina (61%) smatra da u Srbiji danas postoje ozbiljne pre- preke za ostvarivanje slobode medija, dok 4% ima još kritičkiji stav, pa navodi da uopšte ne postoje uslovi za njeno ostvarivanje.

Prvo mišljenje je najraširenije među urednicima štampe (73%), naročito dnevne (92%), zatim među urednicima medija osnovanih pre 1990. godine (66%), urednicima čiji su mediji bili predmet napada (75%), kao i među ured- nicima u Severozapadnoj Srbiji (77%) i u Kraljevačkom regionu (67%).

Veoma mali broj urednika ocenjuje da se medijska prava i slobode potpuno ostvaruju u praksi (3%). Ostali – više od četvrtine njih (29%) – smatraju da u praksi postoje samo sporadični incidenti ugrožavanja slobode medija. Ovo mišljenje je najprisutnije kod TV i RTV-urednika u odnosu na urednike dru- gih vrsta medija (po 34%), kod urednika nacionalnih medija (33%), onih koji nisu iskusili konkretne pritiske, pretnje ili fizičke napade (42%), kao i kod urednika iz Južne Srbije (35%).

ocena ostvarivanja slobode medija  78 | 79

Zakonska regulativa

Glavni urednici različito ocenjuju osnovne pretpostavke – zakonske i institu- cionalne – za ostvarivanje medijskih sloboda i prava. Iako ni o jednoj ne po- stoji većinsko pozitivno mišljenje, oni smatraju da ipak više garancija slobode medija pruža zakonska regulativa, nego postojeće institucije i mehanizmi za primenu zakona.

Mišljenja urednika o tome koliko adekvatno današnji zakoni regulišu medij- ske slobode i prava su gotovo potpuno podeljena. Unutar oba pola dominiraju oni sa stavom umerenog intenziteta. Oko polovine anketiranih (49%) sma- tra da su zakoni dobri (od toga, 3% da su veoma dobri), dok druga polovina (48%) misli da su ti isti zakoni neadekvatni (od toga, 9% da su veoma loši).

Nešto pozitivnije ocene o adekvatnosti zakona imaju urednici periodične štampe (53%), urednici medija osnovanih između 1990. i 2000. godine (55%), urednici medija koji nisu bili izloženi napadima u toku poslednjih godinu i po dana (58%), te urednici iz Istočne Srbije (58%), Šumadije i Pomoravlja (57%) i Jugozapadne Srbije (56%). Nasuprot tome, medijske zakone neodgovaraju- ćima najčešće smatraju urednici nedeljne štampe (50%), nacionalnih medija (50%), medija osnovanih posle 2000. godine (54%), onih koji su bili napadnu- ti (56%), kao i medija iz Beograda, Vojvodine i Južne Srbije (52-53%).

da li važei zakoni adekvatno regulišu medijske slobode i prava? Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Institucionalne garancije

Dok polovina glavnih urednika ipak misli da zakoni regulišu medijske slobo- de i prava na odgovarajući način, apsolutna većina smatra da u Srbiji danas ne postoje adekvatne institucije i mehanizmi za primenu tih zakona (sudo- vi, državni organi, regulatorne agencije, samoregulativna tela, profesionalna udruženja, itd).

Naime, 59% anketiranih ima negativan stav o mreži institucija i procedurama koje one koriste u primeni zakona, a među njima je 17% urednika sa izrazito negativnim stavom. Mišljenje da u Srbiji danas postoje odgovarajuće institu- cionalne garancije slobode medija iskazuje 39% glavnih urednika, a od toga je 3% onih sa veoma pozitivnim stavom.

da li u srbiji postoje adekvatne institucije i mehanizmi za primenu medijskih zakona?

Kritički stav prema institucijama koje treba da štite slobodu natprosečno zastupaju urednici medija koji su u poslednje vreme iskusili napade (69%), urednici nedeljne i periodične štampe (po 68%), RTV-emitera (67%), medija od nacionalnog značaja i onih koji su osnovani pre 1990 (po 63%), te ured- nici iz Beograda (70%), Vojvodine (61%) i Istočne Srbije (63%). Nasuprot tome, natprosečno pozitivne stavove imaju urednici medija osnovanih izme- đu 1990. i 2000. godine (55%), urednici radija i televizije (po 43%), medija koji nisu doživeli napade (49%) i, regionalno gledano, urednici iz Šumadije i Pomoravlja (65%).  80 | 81

Poređenje sa susednim zemljama

Većina glavnih urednika (53%) smatra da je stanje medijskih sloboda i prava u Srbiji približno isto kao u većini tranzicionih zemalja u okruženju. Među onima koji ne misle tako, dvostruko je više onih koji stanje u Srbiji ocenjuju gorim nego kod suseda (17%), nego onih koji ga ocenjuju boljim (8%).

Međutim, značajan broj urednika – preciznije, svaki peti – nije mogao da sa- gleda stanje slobode medija u komparativnoj perspektivi, navodeći najčešće da je nedovoljno obavešten.

kakvo je stanje slobode medija u srbiji – u odnosu na susedne zemlje?

Ocena o sličnosti između Srbije i većine susednih tranzicionih zemalja naj- češće je prisutna kod urednika nedeljne štampe (58%) i RTV-emitera (57%), kod urednika medija osnovanih između 1990. i 2000. godine (61%) i ured- nika medija sa sedištem u Jugozapadnoj Srbiji (69%), te Šumadiji i Pomorav- lju (64%). Percepciju da je stanje u Srbiji komparativno gore imaju ponajviše urednici dnevne štampe (42%), urednici medija osnovanih pre 1990. godine (23%), oni čiji je medij bio izložen napadima (24%) i urednici medija iz Be- ograda (25%) i Vojvodine (24%). Što se tiče optimističkih ocena, one su ra- širenije kod urednika radija (12%), onih čiji mediji nisu bili predmet napada (14%), kao i medija sa sedištem u Južnoj Srbiji (21%) i Šumadiji i Pomoravlju (14%). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

B. PERCEPCIJA SLOBODE MEDIJA I NJENOG UGROŽAVANJA

Od čega zavisi stanje slobode medija?

Po mišljenju većine rukovodećih ljudi u medijima, na stanje medijskih sloboda i prava danas snažnije utiču faktori koji su izvan, nego oni koji deluju unutar me- dijskog sistema. Dve trećine glavnih urednika (65%) smatra da sloboda medija ponajviše zavisi od opšteg društvenog konteksta u kojem mediji funkcionišu (tranzicija, postojeći politički odnosi, dominantne vrednosti u društvu itd). Od faktora iz medijske sfere, kao odlučujući se najčešće pominju dva – ekonomski kapacitet medija (55%) i novinarski profesionalizam (47%), tj. nivo obrazova- nja, poštovanje profesionalnih i etičkih normi, stepen autocenzure, itd. Ova dva faktora smatraju se značajnijim od ponašanja vlasnika medija, kao i od opšteg društvenog položaja sredstava informisanja, koji je regulisan zakonima i na koji utiče odnos centara moći prema novinarima. Urednici smatraju da stepen slo- bode medija zavisi i od nivoa profesionalne organizovanosti i solidarnosti, ali se taj činilac ipak pominje relativno retko (19%).

Stav da opšti društveni uslovi najviše utiču na slobodu medija je nešto manje prisutan kod radijskih (61%), nego kod urednika drugih medija (73-75%); nešto više kod urednika regionalnih i lokalnih medija (73-61%), nego naci- onalnih (55%); te kod urednika medija u Centralnoj Srbiji (70-79%), nego u drugim delovima zemlje (62-65%).  82 | 83

od kojih inilaca zavisi stanje medijskih sloboda i prava?

Najveći značaj ekonomskom položaju medija u odnosu na dostignuti stepen slobode medija daju urednici dnevnih listova (75%, naspram 57% ili manje urednika drugih medija). Veći uticaj mu pripisuju urednici lokalnih medija (57%), nego regionalnih i nacionalnih (42%), kao i urednici iz Južne Srbije i regiona Kraljevo-Pomoravlje (62-60%), nego oni iz ostalih regiona (46-56%) i Šumadije (35%). Uticaj profesionalnosti novinara na slobodu medija smatraju odlučujućim pre svega urednici agencija i nedeljne štampe (60%, naspram 42- 45% urednika iz drugih vidova medija). Više ga vrednuju i urednici nacional- nih (57%), nego lokalnih i regionalnih medija (48-42%), urednici medija koji su osnovani posle 2001. godine (51%, naspram 43% urednika iz medija osnova- nih između 1990. i 2000), kao i urednici iz Šumadije, Južne i Jugozapadne Srbije (56-57%, naspram 45-50% iz drugih krajeva i 29% iz Istočne Srbije). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Ko ugrožava slobodu medija?

Po mišljenju većine glavnih urednika, najozbiljnija narušavanja medijskih sloboda dolaze iz tri izvora – ekonomskih centara moći, državnih struktura i političkih partija i organizacija. Anketirani urednici su iskazali male razlike u rangiranju tri navedena izvora i posledica koje njihovo delovanje ima za rad novinara: 47% smatra da najteža kršenja slobode medija dolaze od ekonom- skih moćnika, 46% da ona potiču iz državnih organa i institucija, a isto toliko da dolaze od političkih partija i organizacija.

koji su izvori narušavanja slobode medija?

Među pojedinim grupama urednika postoje izvesne razlike u pogledu per- cepcije posledica delovanja ekonomskih i državnih centara moći. Urednici beogradskih (70%), štampanih (61%) i nacionalnih medija (65%) češće nego drugi procenjuju da najteža narušavanja slobode medija dolaze od strane eko- nomskih moćnika. Strukture vlasti vide se kao najvažniji izvor ugrožavanja medijskih sloboda češće među urednicima lokalnih (48%), nego regionalnih (46%) i nacionalnih medija (40%), kao i među urednicima medija iz Istočne Srbije (71%) u odnosu na one iz ostalih regiona (31-57%), te među onima koji  84 | 85

su u poslednje dve godine imali iskustvo ugrožavanja slobode i prava (51%) u odnosu na one koji nisu (40%).

Uticaj ostalih potencijalnih izvora ugrožavanja medijskih sloboda urednici smatraju manje važnim. Približno svaki peti anketirani (18,6%) navodi kri- minalne krugove kao nosioce najtežih oblika kršenja slobode medija, a za svakog desetog to su ideološki organizovane grupe (9,5%). Još manji značaj se pridaje devijantnim pojedincima (5,9%), a najmanji delovanju samih novina- ra (4,9%), iako značajan broj glavnih urednika smatra da novinari često krše, tj. zloupotrebljavaju slobodu štampe.

Oblici kršenja slobode medija

Rukovodioci medija ocenjuju da u Srbiji danas preovlađuju tri oblika naruša- vanja slobode medija – ekonomski pritisci, pritisci iz političke sfere, te fizički napadi i pretnje novinarima. Ova tri oblika kao dominantne izdvaja svaki treći glavni urednik koji raspolaže i saznanjima o praksi drugih medija (a ne samo vlastitog). Razlike u ocenama njihove učestalosti su male.

Kao univerzalni se najčešće pominju finansijski pritisci tj. ekonomska nesi- gurnost i zavisnost, u koju se ubraja i nelojalna konkurencija (24% odgovora). Slede fizički napadi i pretnje novinarima (23%). Značajno je da je 133 od 306 anketiranih urednika navelo da su njihovi mediji ili novinari bili predmet napada ili pretnji tokom 2008. godine, dok 79 smatra da su napadi i pretnje opšta karakteristika medijske situacije u Srbiji. Na trećem mestu po učesta- losti su politički pritisci (21%), koje urednici vezuju uz predstavnike vlasti („bahatost“, „zloupotreba državnih ovlašćenja“), pogotovo one iz lokalnih struktura i pogotovo usmerenih na medije koji još nisu privatizovani. Kao značajna i česta prepreka slobode medija ističe se prikrivanje i nedostupnost informacija od javnog značaja, zatvorenost državnih organa za novinare i uopšte netransparentnost vlasti (11%), što ukazuje na neprimenjivanje Zako- na o slobodnom pristupu informacijama od javnog značaja. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

koji su naješi oblici kršenja slobode medija u srbiji?

Urednici kao čest oblik ugrožavanja slobode medija navode i profesionalno, odnosno neprofesionalno ponašanje samih novinara (8% odgovora). Tu se najšečšće uključuju nepoštovanje pravila i etičkog kodeksa, politička pristra- snost novinara i autocenzura.

Po učestalosti pominjanja ovde se izdvaja i postojeća medijska regulativa i pravosudna praksa (5%), odnosno neadekvatno regulisan status medija i no- vinara, ponašanje regulatornih tela, administracije i pravosudnih organa, ne- rasvetljena ubistva i pokušaji ubistava novinara, kao i tužbe protiv novinara.

Kako unaprediti slobodu medija?

Iako glavni urednici kao osnovne uzroke nepovoljnog stanja medijskih slobo- da i prava vide sistemske činioce, oni predlažu niz konkretnih akcija i mera koje bi to stanje mogle unaprediti. Najveći broj poželjnih mera tiče se fizičkih napada i pretnji. Na prvom mestu je tretiranje napada na novinare kao napa-  86 | 87

da na službeno lice (što podržava 52% ispitanika), a zatim oštrije kazne za po- činioce napada i pretnji (38%), efikasniji sudski procesi protiv osumnjičenih (33%) i efikasnije delovanje policije u otkrivanju nosilaca fizičkog i verbalnog nasilja prema novinarima (30%).

Tretiranje napada na novinara kao napada na službeno lice je najpoželjnija pojedinačna mera u svim kategorijama urednika, a posebno je naglašavaju urednici iz Severozapadne (77%) i Južne Srbije (71%). Primenu oštrijih kazni za počinioce napada i pretnji posebno ističu rukovodeći ljudi iz beogradskih medija (43%).

koje konkretne mere e unaprediti slobodu medija?

Približno trećina urednika (30%) smatra da bi se situacija poboljšala prome- nom zakona koji uvredu i klevetu tretira kao krivično delo, dok nešto manji broj (28%) rešenje prevashodno vidi u višem stepenu novinarskog profesio- nalizma, etičnosti i samokritičnosti novinara. Značajan broj urednika (29%) smatra da bi slobodu medija unapredila i bolja zaštita zaposlenih od samovo- lje medijskih vlasnika (npr. potpisivanjem kolektivnog ugovora). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Glavni urednici najslabiji efekat očekuju od davanja publiciteta slučajevima kršenja medijskih sloboda u samim medijima (14%) i delovanja profesional- nih udruženja (21%), s tim što neki naglašavaju da je publicitet već veliki, odnosno da su profesionalna udruženja dovoljno angažovana u tome.  88 | 89

C. KRŠENJE MEDIJSKIH SLOBODA I PRAVA TOKOM 2008. GODINE

Od 306 anketiranih glavnih urednika, 133 su naveli da su njihovi mediji tj. novinari tokom 2008. godine bili žrtve neke vrste ograničavanja medijskih sloboda i prava.

Od 133 napadnuta medija, 11 ih je bilo izloženo fizičkim ili verbalnim napa- dima u prvoj sedmici nakon proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova, 44 je pretrpelo razne oblike napada i pritisaka u vezi sa izveštavanjem o Kosovu, dok je 149 to iskusilo povodom izveštavanja o drugim temama.

kršenje slobode medija tokom . godine

Kako bi se utvrdile razmere ugrožavanja slobode medija pri izveštavanju o kosovskoj krizi, slučajevi kršenja slobode medija koji su nastali tim povodom posmatrani su odvojeno.

Izveštavanje o Kosovu

U sedmici dramatičnih događaja koji su usledili nakon proglašenja nezavisno- sti Kosova odigrao se veliki broj fizičkih napada na medijske izveštače dok su Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

obavljali svoje profesionalne zadatke. Prema dostupnim podacima, fizičkim je napadima bilo izloženo najmanje 30 novinara, fotoreportera, snimatelja ili članova terenskih ekipa (24 domaćih i 6 stranih) iz 12 domaćih (agencije BE- TA i FONET, listovi Večernje novosti, Alo!, Glas javnosti, Naša reč, Subotičke novine, radio-televizijske kuće RTS, B92, Studio B, TV5-Niš, Radio KIM) i 6 stranih medija (hrvatska TV RTL, TV Republike Srpske, ruska televizija na engleskom jeziku Russia Today, nemačka TV ARD, holandski dnevni list NRC Handelsblad i portugalski radio TSF).

Takođe, u nedelji nakon proglašenja nazavisnosti Kosova, uposlenici 7 medija – RTV B92, TV Foks, TV Panonija, TV5 (Užice), Sremske TV, lista Alo! i Ra- dija Boom 93 – bili su predmet pokušaja fizičkog napada i verbalnog nasilja.

Od ukupno 17 domaćih medija čiji su izveštači bili napadnuti, u istraživanju su učestvovali urednici 11 medija (4% ukupno anketiranih) – agencije BETA, listova Alo! i Subotičke novine, RTV B92, RTS-a, TV Studio B, niške i užičke TV5, TV Panonija, Sremske TV i Radija Boom 93.

kršenja slobode medija koja su se ticala izveštavanja o kosovu  90 | 91

Ne računajući napade na terenu i pretnje tokom pomenute dramatične sed- mice, 44 urednika (14%) je navelo da su njihovi mediji i novinari tokom 2008. bili izloženi drugim oblicima ugrožavanja u vezi sa izveštavanjem o kosovskoj temi. Najčešće su u pitanju bile anonimne, verbalne ili pisane pretnje upućene medijima ili novinarima – njih je navelo 25 urednika (57% od pomenutih 44, tj. 8% ukupno anketiranih), dok je 8 urednika reklo da su njihovi mediji bili izloženi „prozivkama“ u drugim medijima. Fizički napad na zaposlene dogo- dio se u tri slučaja, a napad na objekte u jednom. Političkim pritiscima su bila izložena četiri medija, ekonomskim pritiscima tri, a pritiscima od strane vla- snika dva medija. Četiri medija su bila podvrgnuta pritiscima organizovanih grupa, a protiv tri je podignuta tužba.

Napadi i pretnje su se dogodili tokom nasilnih protesta protiv proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova u Beogradu, Nišu, Novom Sadu, Subotici, Užicu i na gra- ničnim prelazima sa Kosovom (Jarinje i Mutivode). U njima su učestvovale i brojne organizovane grupe (sportski navijači, vojni rezervisti, stanovnici ko- sovskih opština, srednjoškolci itd). U većini slučajeva su medijske izveštače napali učesnici protesta. U tri slučaja su novinare napali i pretukli pripadnici policije, a u dva su se napadi odigrali pred pripadnicima policije koji nisu zaštitili izveštače.

koji su razlozi napada na medije pri izveštavanju o kosovu? Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Prema iskazima glavnih urednika, napade, pretnje i pritiske na novinare koji su se bavili Kosovom najčešće su pratile optužbe za nepatriotsku uređivačku politiku. Njih navodi 51% urednika koji su bili izloženi ovim napadima.

Sledeći najčešće navođeni razlog napada na medije jeste politički pristrasna uređivačka politika (24%). U 13% slučajeva se kao razlog napada na novinare pominje sprečavanje prikupljanja podataka o učesnicima događaja o kojima su novinari izveštavali.

Ostali navodni razlozi za napade i pritiske bili su još ređi – neprofesionalno/ neetično izveštavanje (11%), povreda prava i interesa ličnosti (6%).

Izveštavanje o ostalim temama

Oko polovine glavnih urednika, tačnije njih 149, tvrdi da su u prvom kvartalu 2008. godine bili predmet nekog oblika ugrožavanja slobode medija koje nije u neposrednoj vezi sa događajima na Kosovu i izveštavanjem o tome.

Kao najučestaliji oblik kršenja slobode medija ovi urednici navode političke pritiske (41%), zatim pritiske, odnosno „prozivke“ u drugim medijima (28%), anonimne pretnje (26%) i ekonomske pritiske od strane oglašivača i moćnika (22%).

Politički pritisci su bili dominantni u svim medijima izloženim napadima, bez obzira na vrstu (o njima govori 31% urednika štampanih medija, 38% ra- dio-urednika, 51% televizijskih, 55% RTV-urednika), obuhvat publike (50% urednika lokalnih, 34% urednika regionalnih i 33% urednika nacionalnih medija) i godinu osnivanja, a regionalno su bili najviše zastupljeni u medijima u Istočnoj (58% urednika), Severozapadnoj Srbiji (56%) i Vojvodini (44%).

Ekonomske pritiske natprosečno često navode urednici beogradskih medija (38%), a anonimne pretnje urednici iz Južne (43%) i Istočne Srbije (42%).  92 | 93

oblici kršenja slobode medija koji se nisu ticali kosova

Prema tvrdnjama glavnih urednika, mediji su u prvom kvartalu 2008. godi- ne najčešće napadani zbog navodno politički pristrasne, kao i zbog navodno nepatriotske uređivačke politike (čak i kada njihovo izveštavanje nije bilo ve- zano za kosovsku temu). Ove dve zamerke, naime, anketirani urednici ističu kao najčešće razloge koje su navodili počinioci napada. Politički pristrasno izveštavanje pominje 42% urednika, a nepatriotsku uređivačku politiku 23%.

Sprečavanje prikupljanja podataka o učesnicima događaja o kojima se izve- štava navodi 17% urednika, dok isto toliko kaže da počinioci napade pravda- ju povredom prava i interesa ličnosti. Netačno, neprofesionalno ili neetično izveštavanje je, prema urednicima, bilo razlog ugrožavanja 15% medija. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

razlozi napada koji se nisu ticali kosova

Iako postoje izvesne razlike među pojedinim grupama medija, politički pri- strasna uređivačka politika je – od strane svih kategorija urednika – najčešće navođeni razlog napada. Češće od drugih je kao primarni razlog napada isti- ču RTV-urednici (60% urednika RTV-medija, naspram 43% radijskih, 38% televizijskih i 43% urednika štampanih medija), te urednici lokalnih medija (52%, naspram 42% urednika nacionalnih i 36% urednika regionalnih medi- ja).

Mere zaštite

Odgovori medijskih rukovodilaca pokazuju da oni na narušavanje medijskih sloboda i prava uglavnom reaguju pasivno. Najveći broj njih (25%) tokom 2008. nije preduzeo ništa nakon napada kojima su bili izloženi, bez obzira na njihov povod, a najčešća reakcija je bila da su o tome obavestili svoju publiku (24%).

Kada su u pitanju aktivnije reakcije, najveći broj urednika je rešio da o napa- dima obavesti profesionalne organizacije i udruženja, uglavnom domaće, a ponekad i međunarodne (12%). Na sopstvene snage i resurse oslonilo se 8%  94 | 95

medija (koji su samostalno povećali kolektivnu i ličnu bezbednost), dok se 3% urednika obratilo organima vlasti; 7% je prijavilo slučajeve policiji, a samo 3% podnelo tužbu protiv počinilaca (svejedno da li su poznati ili nepoznati).

koje su mere mediji preduzeli radi sopstvene zaštite?

O pasivnoj reakciji medija, čak i na najteže oblike kršenja profesionalnih slo- boda i prava, svedoče i iskazi novinara koji su bili fizički napadnuti prilikom izveštavanja o kosovskoj temi. Prema njihovim saznanjima, mediji u kojima rade su se u reakcijama uglavnom ograničili na sopstveno izveštavanje o inci- dentima. Izuzetak su agencija BETA i Blic, kao i RTV B92.

17. februar 2008, Beograd – Napad demonstranata na ekipu izveštača Stu- dija B:

Napadači nisu identifikovani, niti je protiv njih preduzeta neka pravna akcija. Studio B je dao veliki publicitet ovom događaju. 188

188Iz pisane izjave Mirjane Mitrović (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

17. februar 2008, Beograd – Napad demonstranata na fotoreportera Večer- njih novosti:

Ponašanje Večernjih novosti prema meni je bilo za svaku pohvalu – pokazali su brigu i razumevanje za svog zaposlenog i pomogli mi u svakom pogledu. O napadu na mene je objavljeno u novinama i taj napad je osuđen. Moji napadači nisu identifikovani, ali sam slučajno nedavno poslat da za Reviju 92, koja je u sklopu kompanije „Novosti“, fotografišem suđenje jednom od „heroja“ napada na ambasadu SAD. Hvalio se da ga sudija razume i da će posle promene vlasti, koju očekuje, biti pušten bez ikakvog odlaganja. 189

17. februar 2008, Beograd – Napad demonstranata na ekipu RTS-a:

Napadači nisu identifikovani, niti je protiv njih preduzeta neka pravna akcija. RTS je izvestio o napadima u svom mediju. Iako je uvek jasno definisano šta radimo i kom mediju pripadamo, svako izveštavanje sa terena pri sportskim derbijima, koncertima na otvorenom i mitinzima je rizično. Napadi su u većini slučajeva neselektivni, tj. ostvaruju se prema svim snimateljskim ekipama, bez obzira za koju kuću rade, a naše pozicije su rizične kako zbog blizine potencijalnih napadača tako i zbog malog broja fizičkog obezbeđenja pozicija kamera.190

17. februar 2008, Beograd – Napad demonstranata na ekipu Studija B:

Napadači nisu identifikovani, niti je protiv njih preduzeta neka pravna akcija. Studio B je na sve sledeće događaje u kojima je moglo doći do sličnih incidenata slao muške reportere.191

17. februar 2008, Beograd – Napad policajaca na novinara lista Alo!:

Napadači nisu identifikovani, niti je protiv njih podneta neka pravna akcija. Ja i moj list nismo preduzeli ništa osim objavljivanja teksta u kome je pisano o ovom napadu.192

189 Iz pisane izjave Milutina Labudovića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

190 Iz pisane izjave terenske ekipe RTS-a (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

191 Iz pisane izjave Milane Mrkalj (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).

192 Iz pisane izjave Bojana Radovića (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a).  96 | 97

Glavni urednici agencije BETA, Ivan Cvejić, i dnevnog lista Blic, Veselin Si- monović, uputili su zajednički javni protest direktoru policije Miloradu Ve- ljoviću, zbog odbijanja policije da pruži zaštitu njihovoj dopisnici iz Leskovca Milici Ivanović. Povod je bio incident koji se desio na graničnom punktu Mu- tivode, prilikom fizičkog i verbalnog napada demonstranata na novinarku. Nakon toga, organizatori protesta vojnih rezervista su leskovačkoj novinarki uputili javno izvinjenje. Policijska uprava se takođe izvinila novinarki zbog ponašanja svojih pripadnika, sprovela istragu i ponudila joj da podnese kri- vičnu prijavu protiv dvojice policajaca. Ona je, bojeći se posledica, odustala od toga.

25. februar, granični punkt Mutivode – Napad demonstranata na dopisnicu agencije BETA (i dnevnog lista Blic) iz Leskovca:

Posle javne reakcije mojih redakcija, dobila sam javno izvinjenje organizatora protesta. Istovrmeno, čelnici Policijske uprave u Leskovcu su vodili internu istragu i izvinjavali se. Odbila sam njihovu ponudu da podnesem prijavu protiv policajaca, bojeći se posledica. Na sledećem velikom protestu ratnih vojnih rezervista u Leskovcu imala sam zaštitu lično od načelnika Policijske uprave. Zajedno sa svojim kolegama, on je pored mene štitio i koleginicu iz Večernjih novosti sve vreme protesta od eventualnog napada i rezervista i pripadnika žandarmerije. Kada je u jednom trenutku pripadnik žandarmerije podigao pendrek na koleginicu iz Novosti, udarac je sprečio lično načelnik Policijske uprave.193

Uprava RTV B92 je, osim davanja velikog publiciteta napadima na svoje zapo- slene, kao i na druge medijske radnike u svojim medijima, o njima obavestila domaće i strane profesionalne organizacije i udruženja, ali i tražila policijsku zaštitu, te sama povećala kolektivnu bezbednost kuće i podnela krivičnu pri- javu protiv nepoznatih počinilaca.

193 Iz pisane izjave Milice Ivanović (Dokumentacija Medijskog odeljenja OEBS-a). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Posledice napada

Najveći broj glavnih urednika tvrdi da pritisci, pretnje i napadi kojima su bili izloženi nisu doveli ni do kakvih promena u izveštavanju medija kojima rukovode, niti u ponašanju novinara (65). U jednom broju medija, prema izjavama urednika, promene idu u pravcu suprotnom od onog koji su name- ravali da nametnu izvori i nosioci napada: 24 urednika tvrdi da su se njihove redakcije kasnije još više i doslednije bavile onim što je bilo razlog tih napada. Nešto veći broj, ukupno 33, navodi suprotnu vrstu promena. Naime, 7 ured- nika kaže da se njihovi mediji sada manje nego ranije bave problematičnim temama ili određenim ličnostima i organizacijama, dok 26 primećuje pro- mene u ponašanju pojedinih novinara, bilo da oni posle napada izbegavaju „osetljive“ teme (13 urednika) ili iskazuju veći stepen autocenzure (13).

promene u izveštavanju nakon pritisaka  98 | 99

D. KRŠENJE MEDIJSKIH SLOBODA I PRAVA TOKOM 2007. GODINE

Dve petine anketiranih glavnih urednika (39,5%), odnosno 121 od ukupno 306 ispitanika izjavili su da su mediji kojima rukovode bili izloženi kršenju medijskih sloboda i prava tokom 2007. godine.

da li je tokom . bilo kršenja slobode medija?

Prema navodima anketiranih, slučajevi ugrožavanja slobode bili su najčešći u odnosu na štampane medije, a najređi u odnosu na radio. Njih navodi 67% urednika dnevnih novina, 65% nedeljne i 58% urednika druge periodične štampe, a 26% radio-urednika. Od radijskih urednika, 46% kaže da su bili predmet ugrožavanja profesionalnih sloboda i prava, a od televizijskih to tvr- di njih 37%.

Tokom 2007. godine, ugroženija je bila sloboda medija sa nacionalnom po- krivenošću (55%), nego onih sa lokalnom (38%) i regionalnom publikom (37%). Regionalno posmatrano, napade na medije češće od drugih navode Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

urednici medija iz Šumadije i Pomoravlja (50%), Jugozapadne (47%) i Istočne Srbije (46%), dok su najređi bili napadi u Severozapadnoj (23%) i Južnoj Srbiji (29%).

Oblici

Glavni urednici navode da su bili izloženi i brojnim i raznovrsnim oblicima kršenja sloboda i prava medija tokom 2007. godine. Od ukupno 121 urednika (39,5% anketiranih) koji kažu da su pretrpeli neki oblik ugrožavanja slobode medija, 50 ispitanika (41%, tj. 16% ukupnog uzorka) tvrdi da su bili izloženi političkim pritiscima; 35 urednika (29%, tj. 11%) ističe da su bili predmet anonimnih pretnji; a 30 urednika (25%, tj. 10%) kaže da su doživeli ekonom- ske pritiske od strane oglašivača ili drugih ekonomskih moćnika.

Brojne su bile i optužbe i „prozivanja“ u drugim medijima. Njih navodi 38 urednika (31%, tj. 12% ukupnog uzorka), dok 24 urednika tvrde da su protiv njihovih novinara pokrenute sudske tužbe (20%, tj. 8%).

koji su bili oblici kršenja sloboda i prava tokom . godine?  100 | 101

Ostali oblici kršenja prava i sloboda bili su ređi i podrazumevali su pretnje or- ganizovanih grupa (navodi ih 16 urednika, tj. 12% onih koji su pretrpeli neki oblik napada), napade na objekte i imovinu (12 urednika, tj. 10%), pritiske od strane vlasnika medija (takođe 12, tj. 10%) i fizičke napade na zaposlene (9 urednika tj. 7%).

Političkim pritiscima su bili najviše izloženi RTV-mediji (njih navodi 29% svih RTV-urednika), periodična štampa (21%) i televizije (20%), kao i mediji iz Južne Srbije, te Šumadije i Pomoravlja (po 21%) i Vojvodine (20%).

Anonimnim pretnjama su bili natprosečno izloženi periodična štampa (16%), mediji sa nacionalnom pokrivenošću (15%), najmlađi mediji (tj. osnovani posle petooktobarskih promena – 15%), mediji iz Istočne Srbije i Kraljevač- kog regiona (po 17%), Beograda i Južne Srbije (po 15%).

Pritiske od strane oglašivača i ekonomskih moćnika više nego drugi prijavlju- ju urednici periodike (32%), urednici medija sa sedištem u Beogradu, dnev- nih novina i medija sa najširom ciljnom publikom (po 25%).

Pokretanje tužbi protiv novinara češće od drugih navode urednici nedeljnika (28%) i dnevne štampe (25%), kao i urednici medija iz Šumadije i Pomoravlja (21%).

Poređenje stanja slobode medija tokom 2007. i 2008. godine

Od glavnih urednika je zatraženo i da – iz perspektive učestalosti slučajeva kršenja slobode medija – uporede svoja iskustva tokom 2007. i 2008. godine.

Na pitanje je odgovorila otprilike polovina ispitanika (53%), jer su ostali tvr- dili da nisu pretrpeli napade u obe godine. Od onih koji su odgovorili, 46% je navelo da su napadi na njihov mediji bili brojniji 2007. godine, a 18% da su bili češći 2008 (7% da su bili najčešći u drugoj polovini posmatranog perio- da 2008. godine, tj. nakon proglašenja nezavisnosti Kosova), dok trećina nije mogla da se izjasni. Neki su naveli da ne znaju odgovor na ovo pitanje (22%), a od preostalih 14%, neki urednici su rekli da im je najteže bilo pre 2007. godine, dok je značajan, premda ne i opredeljujući broj urednika, naveo da pritisci uvek rastu u vreme izbornih kampanja. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine  102 | 103

VII | Kratak osvrt na medijske zakone Medijska scena Srbije regulisana je Zakonom o javnom informisanju,194 Zako- nom o radiodifuziji,195 Zakonom o slobodnom pristupu informacijama od jav- nog značaja,196 Zakonom o oglašavanju,197 Zakonom o telekomunikacijama198 i Zakonom o zaštiti podataka o ličnosti.199 Radna grupa pri Ministarstvu kulture Republike Srbije radi na izradi Nacrta Zakona o prevenciji medijske koncentra- cije i transparentnosti vlasništva. ZAKON O JAVNOM INFORMISANJU uređuje pravo na javno informisanje pod ko- jim se podrazumeva šest različitih sloboda: 1. sloboda izražavanja; 2. sloboda prikupljanja, istraživanja, objavljivanja i širenja ideja, informacija i mišljenja; 3. sloboda štampanja i distribucije novina i drugih javnih glasila; 4. sloboda proi- zvodnje i emitovanja radio i televizijskog programa; 5. sloboda primanja ideja, informacija i mišljenja; 6. sloboda osnivanja pravnih lica koja se bave javnim informisanjem. 200

194 Zakon o javnom informisanju (Službeni glasnik RS br. 43/2003 i 61/2005), usvojen 23. aprila 2003; trenutno je na snazi verzija od 26. jula 2005.

195 Zakon o radiodifuziji (Službeni glasnik RS br 42/2002, 97/2004, 76/2005, 79/2005 – dr. zakon, 62/2006, 85/2006 i 86/2006 – ispr.), usvojen 27. jula 2002; trenutno je na snazi verzija od 11. oktobra 2006.

196 Zakon o slobodnom pristupu informacijama od javnog značaja (Službeni glasnik RS br. 120/2004 i 54/2007), usvojen 13. novembra 2004; trenutno je na snazi verzija od 13. juna 2007.

197 Zakon o oglašavanju (Službeni glasnik RS br. 79/2005), usvojen 24. septembra 2005.

198 Zakon o telekomunikacijama (Službeni glasnik RS br. 44/2003 i 36/2006), usvojen 2. maja 2003, trenutno je na snazi verzija od 5. maja 2006

199 Zakon o zaštiti podataka o ličnosti (Službeni glasnik RS br. 97/2008), usvojen 23. oktobra 2008.

200 Vidi napomenu 190, član 1. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

Ovaj zakon kao osnovno načelo propisuje da je javno informisanje slobodno, da predstavlja javni interes i da ne podleže cenzuri.201 Zabranjeno je ograniča- vanje slobode javnog informisanja, a od načina ograničavanja zakon posebno pominje: fizički ili drugi pritisak, zloupotrebu državnih ili privatnih ovlašćenja, zloupotrebu prava, uticaj ili kontrolu nad sredstvima štampanja i distribucije javnih glasila.202 Da zaštita koju pruža ovaj zakon ne bi bila nekompletna, doda- ta je i zabrana svih drugih načina ograničavanja slobodnog protoka informacija i ideja. 203 Često se dešava da političari vrše pritisak na medije zbog tekstova koji se odno- se na njih. Povodom toga, važno je naglasiti da ovaj zakon – ukoliko se radi o informacijama koje su važne za javnost – ograničava pravo na zaštitu privatno- sti nosiocima državnih i političkih funkcija.204 ZAKONOM O RADIODIFUZIJI uređuju se, pre svega, uslovi i načini obavljanja ra- diodifuzne delatnosti.205 Pored toga, taj propis uvodi Republičku radiodifuznu agenciju i ustanove javnog radiodifuznog servisa i precizira postupak izdavanja dozvole za emitovanje radio i televizijskog programa, ali i uređuje druga pita- nja od značaja za oblast radiodifuzije.206 Pod ustanovama javnog radiodifuznog servisa podrazumevaju se Radio televizija Srbije i Radio televizija Vojvodine. ZAKONOM O SLOBODNOM PRISTUPU INFORMACIJAMA OD JAVNOG ZNAČAJA uređuje se pravo građana i građanki na pristup informacijama kojima raspola- žu državni organi, a koje su od javnog značaja.207 Zakonom je osnovana i insti- tucija Poverenika za informacije od javnog značaja, koji prati kako državni or- gani poštuju obaveze koje su preuzeli zakonom.208 Zabranjena je diskriminacija novinara i javnih glasila: ukoliko više novinara pošalje isti zahtev, državni organ ne sme nikoga privilegovati, pogotovo ne tako što će mu ekskluzivno ili priori-

201 Ibid, član 2, stavovi 1 i 2.

202 Ibid, član 2, stavovi 3 i 4.

203 Ibid, član 2, stav 3.

204 Ibid

205 Vidi napomenu 191, član 1.

206 Ibid.

207 Vidi napomenu 192, član 1, stav 1.

208 Ibid, član 1, stav 2; i član 35.  104 | 105

tetno omogućiti ostvarivanje ovog prava.209 Pogodnost koja se daje novinarima sastoji se u tome što oni nisu dužni da plaćaju naknadu za troškove kopiranja i slanja traženog dokumenta. 210 ZAKON O OGLAŠAVANJU uređuje uslove i način oglašavanja, kao i prava i oba- veze oglašivača, proizvođača i prenosilaca i primalaca oglasnih poruka.211 Pod prenosiocem Zakon podrazumeva javna glasila čiju osnovnu ili sporednu sadr- žinu čine oglasne poruke,212 ali dozvoljava da to mogu biti i druga pravna lica ili preduzetnici koji javno izlože oglasno sredstvo ili poruku, kao i organizatori kulturno-zabavnih, sportskih ili drugih javnih manifestacija koji auditorijumu prenose oglasne poruke.213 Limiti oglašavanja su postavljeni tako da komercijal- ne TV-stanice imaju pravo na prikazivanje reklama u opsegu do 20% od uku- pnog programa (tj. do 12 minuta po emitovanom satu), a javni radio-difuzni servis na dvostruko manje (tj. do 10% ukupnog programa i najviše 6 minuta po satu). ZAKON O TELEKOMUNIKACIJAMA uređuje uslove i način obavljanja delatnosti u oblasti telekomunikacija i osnivanje Republičke agencije za telekomunikacije.214 Pored toga, ovaj zakon utvrđuje i ovlašćenja za regulisanje odnosa u oblasti tele- komunikacija, sprečavanje monopolskog ponašanja, principe i postupak dode- ljivanja dozvola za obavljanje delatnosti, tarife telekomunikacionih usluga, in- terkonekciju telekomunikacionh mreža i operatora, zakup linija, obim, sadržinu i unapređenje usluga univerzalnog servisa, prava i obaveze telekomunikacionih operatora, radiokomunikacije, međunarodne telekomunikacije i druga pitanja značajna za funkcionisanje i razvoj telekomunikacija u Srbiji. 215 ZAKON O ZAŠTITI PODATAKA O LIČNOSTI reguliše uslove za prikupljanje i obra- du podataka o ličnosti, ostvarivanje i zaštitu prava lica čiji se podaci prikupljaju i obrađuju, ograničenja zaštite podataka o ličnosti, postupak za zaštitu podataka

209 Ibid, član 7.

210 Ibid, član 17.

211 Vidi napomenu 193, član 1.

212 Ibid, član 2, stav 1, tačka 6.

213 Ibid, član 2, stav 1, tačka 7.

214 Vidi napomenu 194, član 1.

215 Ibid. Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

o ličnosti, iznošenje podataka iz Republike Srbije i nadzor nad poštovanjem zakona.216 Zaštita podataka o ličnosti poverena je Povereniku za informacije od javnog značaja kome je ovim zakonom u naziv funkcije dodato „i zaštitu podataka o ličnosti“.217 Usvajanje samog zakona obeležila su krupna razmimoi- laženja između predlagača i civilnog sektora, predstavnika četvrte grane vlasti i međunarodnih organizacija. Predmet spora bilo je to što je državnim organima dato ovlašćenje da Povereniku uskrate mogućnost obelodanjivanja podataka ukoliko je to (po proceni samog organa) potrebno iz razloga državne i javne bezbednosti. To je faktički značilo da bi organ nad kojim se vrši nadzor sam odlučivao da li će tog nadzora biti i u kojoj meri. Predlagač je kasnije izmenio ovu odredbu, propisujući da pre uskraćivanja podataka državni organ mora da traži mišljenje predsednika Kasacionog suda. Poverenik za informacije od jav- nog značaja ocenio je da je ovo rešenje bolje od prethodnog, ali da se i ono za- sniva na ideji da neko može suspendovati i ograničavati ovlašćenja nadzornog organa, tj. Poverenika.218 Dodao je i da međunarodni standardi predviđaju punu nezavisnost nadzornih organa i da ovakvo rešenje postoji samo u Srbiji, zbog čega je, po njegovom mišljenju, malo verovatno da će Srbija od Evropske Unije dobiti prelaznu ocenu. 219 Svakako bi trebalo pomenuti i KRIVIČNI ZAKONIK REPUBLIKE SRBIJE,220 kojim su definisana krivična dela klevete i uvrede. Do zadnjih izmena ovog zakona iz 2005. godine, za izvršenje ovih krivičnih dela bila je predviđena kazna zatvora do tri godine. Sa stupanjem izmenjenog zakona na snagu, u Srbiji je izvršena depena- lizacija, ali ne i puna dekriminalizacija klevete i uvrede. To znači da je ukinuta mogućnost zatvorske kazne, ali da su one još uvek krivična dela, a ne prekršaji (kao što je slučaj u velikoj većini demokratskih društava). U vezi sa ovim, dobro je poznat stav kancelarije Specijalnog predstavnika OEBS-a za slobodu medija – da je potpuna dekriminalizacija klevete i uvrede najbolje moguće i jedino rešenje koje će u potpunosti biti u skladu sa demokratskim standardima i civilizovanim odnosima u savremenim društvima.

216 Vidi napomenu 195, član 1, stav 1.

217 Ibid, član 1, stav 3.

218 Saopštenje za javnost Poverenika za informacije od javnog značaja, 27. oktobar 2008 (http://www.poverenik.org.yu/saopstenja.asp).

219 Ibid.

220 Krivični zakonik (Službeni glasnik RS br. 85/2005, 88/2005 – ispr. i 107/2005 – ispr.) Zakon je usvojen 29. septembra 2005, a stupio je na snagu 1. januara 2006.  106 | 107

VIII | Zaključci „ U Srbiji još uvek ne postoje uslovi za potpunu autonomiju medija i ostva- rivanje medijskih sloboda i prava. Medijski sistem karakterišu zakasnela i nedovršena tranzicija, ubrzana komercijalizacija (u uslovima siromašnog i neregulisanog tržišta), spora transformacija vlasništva, slabosti zakonske regulative i institucija koje se brinu o primeni zakona, mala finansijska moć medija, nizak stepen obrazovanosti i profesionalizma, kao i veliki broj napada na novinare. Sve to utiče na način na koji mediji obavljaju svoju društvenu funkciju.

„ Prema dostupnim informacijama, tokom 2008. godine u Srbiji je registro- vano 138 napada na novinare. Reč je o 76 fizičkih napada na novinare i njihovu imovinu i 62 pretnje, verbalnih napada, pritisaka i raznih oblika onemogućavanja obavljanja dužnosti. Zabeleženo je i 8 sudskih presuda protiv novinara. Ovo najverovatnije nije konačan broj incidenata, ali se radi o podacima do kojih je OEBS došao raspolažući informacijama koje je bilo moguće prikupiti.

„ Od 306 anketiranih glavnih urednika, 133 su navela da su njihovi medi- ji i novinari bili izloženi ograničavanju medijskih prava i sloboda tokom 2008. godine.

„ Od ukupnog broja anketiranih glavnih urednika medija u Srbiji, 84,3% ima negativan stav o stanju medijskih prava i sloboda u Srbiji.

„ Po mišljenju rukovodećih ljudi u srpskim medijima, glavni problem slo- bode medija pre se svodi na njeno ostvarivanje u praksi, nego na njene zakonske i institucionalne garancije.

„ Od ukupnog broja anketiranih, 43,9% glavnih urednika smatra da su za- koni koji uređuju medijsku oblast dobri, 47,7% da su zakoni neadekvatni, Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

dok preostalih 3% nije dalo ocenu. Takođe, 58,9% glavnih urednika sma- tra da ne postoje adekvatne medijske institucije u zemlji, 38,9% misli da postoje, dok se preostalih 2,2% nije izjasnilo.

„ Što se tiče poređenja stanja slobode medija u Srbiji sa susednim zemljama, 53,1% misli da je stanje približno isto, 17,4% da je stanje u Srbiji gore nego u regionu, a 8,2% da je bolje. Svoju ocenu nije dalo 1% anketiranih, dok je 20,3% izjavilo da zbog neobaveštenosti nije u stanju da sagleda kompara- tivnu perspektivu.

„ Skoro dve trećine glavnih urednika smatra da sloboda medija prevashod- no zavisi od opšteg društvenog konteksta u kojem mediji funkcionišu (tranzicija, politički odnosi, dominantne vrednosti u društvu itd). Od fak- tora iz medijske sfere izdvajaju dva: ekonomski kapacitet medija i profesi- onalizam novinara.

„ U pogledu izvora ugrožavanja slobode medija, glavni urednici uglavnom smatraju da najozbiljnija narušavanja slobode medija dolaze iz tri izvora: ekonomskih centara moći, državnih struktura, te političkih partija i orga- nizacija. Ostali smatraju da ugrožavanje dolazi iz kriminalnih krugova, od strane ideološki organizovanih grupa, devijantnih pojedinaca i iz samih medija.

„ Što se tiče oblika kršenja medijskih prava i sloboda, čelnici srpskih medija smatraju da preovlađuju tri: ekonomski pritisci (23,6%), napadi i pretnje novinarima (23%), te politički pritisci (20,9%). Slede prikrivanje i nedo- stupnost informacija od javnog značaja (11,4%), neprofesionalizam novi- nara (7,9%), regulatorna i pravosudna praksa (5,3%), pritisci neformalnih moćnika (3,8%), ponašanje vlasnika (1,8%) i ostalo (2,3%).

„ Po mišljenju anketiranih urednika, najpoželjnija mera za unapređenje me- dijskih prava i sloboda bila bi ta da se napadi na novinare tretiraju kao napadi na službeno lice (52,3%). Slede: oštrije kazne za počinioce (37,9%), efikasniji sudski procesi (33,3%), promena zakona koji uvredu i klevetu tretira kao krivično delo (30,4%), efikasnije delovanje policije (29,7%), ko- lektivni ugovori (28,8%) i veći stepen novinarskog profesionalizma, etič- nosti i samokritičnosti novinara (27,5%). Odgovori glavnih urednika su pokazali da se najmanje efekta očekuje od davanja publiciteta slučajevima  108 | 109

kršenja slobode medija (14%) i delovanja profesionalnih udruženja novi- nara (21%).

„ Prema tvrdnjama glavnih urednika, mediji su u prvom kvartalu 2008. go- dine najčešće napadani zbog navodno politički pristrasne uređivačke po- litike (42%), kao i zbog navodno nepatriotske uređivačke politike (23%). Sprečavanje prikupljanja podataka o učesnicima događaja o kojima se izveštava navodi 17% urednika, dok isto toliko kaže da nosioci napada kao razlog svog delovanja ističu povredu prava i interesa ličnosti. Netačno, neprofesionalno ili neetično izveštavanje je, prema urednicima, bilo razlog ugrožavanja 15% medija.

„ Odgovori medijskih rukovodilaca pokazuju da oni na narušavanje medij- skih sloboda i prava uglavnom reaguju pasivno. Najveći broj njih (25%) tokom 2008. nije preduzeo ništa nakon napada kojima su bili izloženi, bez obzira na njihov povod, a najčešća reakcija je bila da su o tome oba- vestili svoju publiku (24%). Kada su u pitanju aktivnije reakcije, najveći broj urednika je rešio da o napadima obavesti profesionalne organizacije i udruženja, uglavnom domaće, a ponekad i međunarodne (12%). Na sop- stvene snage i resurse oslonilo se 8% medija (koji su samostalno poveća- li kolektivnu i ličnu bezbednost), dok se 3% urednika obratilo organima vlasti; 7% je prijavilo slučajeve policiji, a samo 3% podnelo tužbu protiv počinilaca (svejedno da li su poznati ili nepoznati).

„ Najveći broj glavnih urednika (65) tvrdi da pritisci, pretnje i napadi koji- ma su bili izloženi nisu doveli do promena u izveštavanju medija kojima rukovode, niti u ponašanju novinara. U jednom broju medija, prema izja- vama urednika, promene idu u pravcu suprotnom od onog koji su želeli da nametnu napadači: 24 urednika trvdi da su se njihove redakcije posle napada još više i doslednije bavile onim što je bilo razlog tih napada. Nešto više njih (33) navodi suprotnu vrstu promena: tako 7 urednika kaže da se njihovi mediji sada manje nego ranije bave problematičnim temama, ličnostima ili organizacijama, dok 26 primećuje promene u ponašanju po- jedinih novinara, bilo da oni posle napada izbegavaju „osetljive“ teme (13) ili iskazuju veći stepen autocenzure (13). Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine  110 | 111

IX | Preporuke „ Novinari koji su žrtve kršenja medijskih prava i sloboda u Srbiji, kao i me- dijske kuće u kojima oni rade, trebalo bi da nadležnim državnim organi- ma, domaćim i međunarodnim udruženjima novinara, ali i međunarod- nim organizacijama, prijave svaki incident koji se dogodi. Sa druge strane, nadležni državni organi moraju, radi ostvarenja svog mandata i ispunjenja zakonskih obaveza, učiniti sve što je u njihovoj moći kako bi slučajevi kr- šenja medijskih prava i sloboda bili istraženi i procesuirani, a počinioci identifikovani i, u skladu sa zakonom, kažnjeni. Ubistva Dade Vujasinović, Slavka Ćuruvije, Milana Pantića kao i pokušaj ubistva Dejana Anastasije- vića, moraju biti rešena, jer sve dok počinioci tih teških zločina ne budu privedeni pravdi – istinska sloboda medija u Srbiji neće postojati.

„ Privatizacija medija u Srbiji trebalo bi da bude nastavljena i okončana. Mediji će biti oslobođeni od upliva i pritisaka političkih struktura i eko- nomskih centara moći jedino ukoliko su finansijski nezavisni i ukoliko se ne finansiraju iz budžetskih sredstava.

„ Vlada Republike Srbije bi u saradnji sa međunarodnim organizacijama i udruženjima novinara trebalo da u 2009. godini usmeri svoju pažnju i sredstva na jačanje institucija koje nadziru primenu medijskih zakona i udruženja novinara (NUNS i UNS). Sa druge strane, NUNS i UNS bi trebalo da dovrše proces formiranja i početka efektivnog rada Saveta za štampu.

„ Ministarstvo kulture Republike Srbije, kao i druga ministarstva u čiji de- lokrug rada ulazi izrada nekog od medijskih zakona ili zakona koji su po- vezani sa medijima, trebalo bi da u 2009. godini okončaju proces reforme medijskog zakonodavstva. To se pre svega odnosi na usvajanje Zakona o prevenciji medijske koncentracije i transparentnosti vlasništva, Zakona o Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

elektronskim medijima, Izmena i dopuna Zakona o radiodifuziji, Zakona o javnom informisanju itd.

„ U međuvremenu, trebalo bi unaprediti primenu postojećih medijskih propisa: Zakona o javnom informisanju, Zakona o slobodnom pristupu informacijama, Zakona o radiodifuziji, Zakona o oglašavanju i Zakona o telekomunikacijama.

„ Da bi se problem medijskih prava i sloboda u Srbiji sistemski rešio, potreb- no je izraditi strategiju za unapređenje medijskih sloboda, koja bi odredila u kojim pravcima bi aktivnosti svih nadležnih institucija trebalo da se kre- ću. U izradi ove strategije trebalo bi da učestvuju predstavnici nadležnih ministarstava, udruženja novinara, nevladinih organizacija, medijske in- dustrije, međunarodnih organizacija, kao i nezavisni medijski eksperti.  112 | 113

X | Bibliografija Spisak pravnih propisa, izveštaja i veb sajtova korišćenih kao izvor 1. Zakon o javnom informisanju (Službeni glasnik RS br. 43/2003 i 61/2005), usvojen 23. aprila 2003; trenutno je na snazi verzija od 26. jula 2005. 2. Zakon o radiodifuziji (Službeni glasnik RS br 42/2002, 97/2004, 76/2005, 79/2005 – dr. zakon, 62/2006, 85/2006 i 86/2006 – ispr.), usvojen 27. jula 2002; trenutno je na snazi verzija od 11. oktobra 2006. 3. Zakon o slobodnom pristupu informacijama od javnog značaja (Službeni glasnik RS br. 120/2004 i 54/2007), usvo- jen 13. novembra 2004; trenutno je na snazi verzija od 13. juna 2007. 4. Zakon o oglašavanju (Službeni glasnik RS br. 79/2005), usvojen 24. septembra 2005. 5. Zakon o telekomunikacijama (Službeni glasnik RS br. 44/2003 i 36/2006), usvojen 2. maja 2003, trenutno je na snazi verzija od 5. maja 2006. 6. Zakon o zaštiti podataka o ličnosti (Službeni glasnik RS br. 97/2008), usvojen 23. oktobra 2008. 7. Krivični zakonik (Službeni glasnik RS br. 85/2005, 88/2005 – ispr. i 107/2005 – ispr.) Zakon je usvojen 29. septembra 2005, a stupio je na snagu 1. januara 2006. 8. Izveštaj Stratedžik Marketinga Novinari i novinarstvo u očima građana i novinara Srbije 9. Izveštaj Udruženja novinara Srbije o napadima i pretnjama novinarima od početka godine do avgusta 2008 Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine

10. Centar za slobodne izbore i demokratiju: www.cesid.org 11. Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije: www.nuns.org 12. B92 www.b92.net 13. Dnevni list Danas www.danas.rs 14. Novinska agencija Vranje Press www.vranjepres.info 15. Asocijacija nezavisnih elektronskih medija: www.anem.org.yu 16. Novinar Justin Vela: www.justinvela.com 17. Udruženje novinara Srbije: www.unsonline.org 18. Net novinar: www.naslovi.net 19. Vesti: www.vesti.rs 20. Dnevni list Press: www.pressonline.rs 21. Dnevni list Blic: www.blic.rs 22. Subotica info: www.subotica.info 23. Dnevni list Glas javnosti: www.glas-javnosti.rs 24. Novinska agencija TANJUG: www.tanjug.co.yu 25. Dnevni list Večernje novosti: www.novosti.rs 26. Dnevni list Kurir www.kurir-info.rs 27. Mefeedia www.mefeedia.com 28. Nezavisno društvo novinara Vojvodine: www.ndnv.org 29. Radio televizija Vojvodine: www.rtv.co.yu 30. Dnevni list Građanski list: www.gradjanski.rs 31. Media centra: www.mediacenter.org.yu 32. Dnevni list Dnevnik: www.kikinda.cc 33. Poverenik za informacije od javnog značaja www.poverenik.org.yu 114 | 115 Sloboda medija u Srbiji 2008. godine