The state did not do everything it should have done to "Vijesti" journalists Vuk Lajović protect against attacks by the defunct portal "udar.me", which published numerous falsehoods and insults about it on the eve of the parliamentary elections.
Thus, according to the assessment of the Basic Court of Kotor, Lajović's personal rights were violated - the rights to psychological integrity, honor, reputation and dignity.
With the first-instance verdict, the Kotor court obliged the state, that is, the Ministry of Culture and Media, to pay the "Vijesti" journalist 3.000 euros with the corresponding legal interest in the name of compensation for non-material damages due to the violation of personal rights.
In a series of tabloid articles, in August 2020, the "udar.me" portal launched attacks on several politicians, journalists, priests...
Lajović was then identified as an associate of the Serbian security services, under the code name "Opusak", and the alleged operative link was the now detained president of the Municipality of Budva Milo Bozovic.
The court emphasized that it was undisputedly established that it was "incorrect information".
"Direct impact on honor and reputation"
"The publication on the portal 'udar.me' directly affected the honor and reputation of the prosecutor, because it presented him to the general public as the perpetrator of a serious criminal offense against the constitutional order and security of Montenegro - espionage from Article 368 of the Criminal Code of Montenegro, and thereby violated his human dignity guaranteed by the Constitution of Montenegro and the European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms. Every person has the right to correct personal data, delete or remove it, and so does the prosecutor, bearing in mind that in this procedure the information relating to him was undisputedly found to be incorrect, which is why the public has no interest in receiving such information in in which, as part of the untrue statements, the prosecutor is also mentioned by his full name and surname, with special appreciation of the circumstance that the prosecutor did not cause such information by his actions, and that he was not included in the criminal proceedings for the commission of a serious criminal offense against the constitutional order and security of Montenegro" , reads the judge's ruling Veljko Bulatović.
Lajović's proxy, lawyer Nikola Angelovski he said that the verdict in the case of the "Vijesti" journalist is the second verdict, when it comes to the cases initiated due to the lack of reaction of the state to the tabloid publications of the controversial portal.
"The first final verdict is in the case of Vlad Bulatović from Podgorica, which will now be valid in all other cases, because in all other cases it is about the same factual situation and legal basis as in his case," said Angelovski.
He could not specify the number of cases that are being conducted on the same basis before the Montenegrin courts.
"I currently have more than 15 cases, and a lot of cases are with other colleagues in Bijelo Polje and Berane", answered Angelovski to "Vijesta".
What did the state not do?
The court notes that the defendant - the state, had objective opportunities to, in terms of monitoring the application of the Media Act, disclose, make available to the public and initiate misdemeanor proceedings against the founder, and all this after August 14, 2020, until the date of filing this lawsuit.
"...Which would enable the prosecutor to find out his identity and obtain the protection of the violated right from the responsible person - the founder of the media, responsible for the published media content (Article 24 of the Law on Media). The non-material damage that occurred to the plaintiff as a third party was solely a consequence of the non-performance of the functions entrusted by the Media Act to the current Ministry of Culture and Media (previously the Ministry of Public Administration, Digital Society and Media, and before that the Ministry of Culture)... With regard to obligations and responsibilities the defendant in terms of the provisions of the Law on Media, and other institutional capacities at her disposal (state prosecutor's office, Police Directorate), there is a clear cause-and-effect relationship between the defendant's inaction and the resulting consequences for the prosecutor...", the judgment states.
Judge Bulatović bases such a position on the evidence related to the obligations of the Ministry arising from the Law on Media from 2020.
He reminds that the internet publication of the "udar.me" portal was made on July 10, 2020, and that its existence was visible to the general public soon after.
"In the announcement of the Agency for Electronic Media dated August 3, 8, it is stated that the existence of portals was observed that did not fulfill their legal obligations to register in the register and provide identification, while the disputed content about the plaintiff was published on this portal on August 2020 . in 18," reads the verdict.
The Court also reminds that, with the entry into force of the Law on Media, as of August 14, 8, the provisions of the Law on Electronic Media, which referred to the competence of the Agency for Electronic Media over electronic publications, ceased to be valid.
"In the response of the Ministry of Culture and Media dated October 18, 10 to the letter for the submission of data for the online publication (portal) udar.me, it was stated that the media that are not registered with the relevant ministries are not obligated to comply with media regulations in Montenegro , that the Ministry did not take over the activities of collecting data on media that were not entered in the records, that the registration is done on a voluntary basis in accordance with Article 2022 of the then valid Media Act, that the Ministry is not competent for the lease and registration of the national domain, nor for supervision for the application of the Law on Electronic Communications, that they are not in possession of the requested data...", the judgment states.
The court further notes that from the letter of the company "Domen" dated January 30, 1, it follows that "there was no request from the Agency for Electronic Media and the Ministry of Culture and Media to obtain data on the domain name in question, nor to check the content of this domain ".
"...Due to the contents published on this portal, which in relation to the plaintiff had a defamatory character, the defendant should and had to undertake a specific activity, which would initially determine the founder or owner of the media, in order to register it, and later undertook other options for limiting media content, which is prescribed in Articles 34 to 47 of the Media Act," the judgment concluded.
Former director of the National Security Agency (ANB) and current security adviser to the president Dejan Vuksic in May, the portal Udar was released from keeping a secret about the affair.
Previously, the Parliament of Montenegro did the same for the leader of the Civic Movement URA Dritan Abazović, who, during the hearing in one of the cases against the state, presented the names of people from ANB who, on the eve of the 2020 parliamentary elections, discredited political opponents, activists, journalists and priests of the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) through the Udar.me portal.
"When it comes to officials, I announced that the material created by the secret escort of the ANB was used as material for the Udar portal. At that time, he was at the head of the secret escort Srđan Pavićević, and at the head of another sector Danilo Grozdanić", Abazović said in court at the beginning of April, but also marked Filip Đuranović as one of the administrators of the Udar.me portal.
These, as well as many other, names of ANB agents are on the list and in the criminal report that Vukšić previously submitted to the Special State Prosecutor's Office (SDT).
ZIPI: Speed up discussions and finalize proceedings
Angelovski points out that the legal situation in connection with the posts on the Udar.me portal is "on the whole the same for all the persons with whom this portal dealt with in an obviously illegal manner".
"...And the judicial practice has already been established through several judgments and says that the responsibility of the state in all these cases is unquestionable, it would be logical and expected that the competent authorities of the state of Montenegro offer an appropriate settlement and thus avoid significant court costs which, in otherwise, the state will be exposed", he said.
The institution of the Protector of Property and Legal Interests told "Vijesti" yesterday that they do not approach settlements "bearing in mind that it is a request on which the court decides with regard to the amount of compensation, taking into account the personal characteristics of the plaintiff, the degree of damage to the material property..., so the amounts are different".
"However, the position of the Protector is that certain evidence presented (examined witnesses) in the same legal matter should also be used in other proceedings and in this way speed up the conclusion of the hearings, and thus end the proceedings," said the institution of the Protector.
Due to the published content on this portal, which in relation to the plaintiff had a defamatory character, the defendant should and had to undertake a specific activity, which would initially determine the founder or owner of the media, in order to register it, and later undertake and other possibilities of limiting media content, which is prescribed in Articles 34 to 47 of the Law on Media", the verdict reads.
Bonus video:
