Judge Vuksanović ruled that Martinović must tolerate insult and defamation

Although civil activist Draško Martinović Didi was labeled a nationalist, right-winger, and extremist in the disgraceful propaganda piece authored by Jelena Jovanović, who is also a journalist at „Vijesti“, and former editor of BIRN’s Balkan Insight platform Dušica Tomović, for Judge Daliborka Vuksanović of the Basic Court in Podgorica this constitutes freedom of expression and value judgment. And she considers that the defendants „did not act with the intention to harm the plaintiff’s reputation“.

This is the reasoning of the first-instance judgment by which Judge Vuksanović dismissed as unfounded Martinović’s lawsuit against Jovanović and Tomović for violation of personal rights to honor, reputation, psychological integrity, and dignity. Martinović was also ordered to reimburse Jovanović and Tomović for legal costs in the amount of 2,382 euros.

The scandalous map was produced for the organization BIRN and was presented and published in November 2022 at an international conference in Sarajevo. Already during the panel, participants reacted sharply to the part of the map concerning Montenegro, in which nine Montenegrin civil activists, including two journalists, were labeled as security threats, as far-right extremists and religious fanatics.

The map was withdrawn less than a month later, in December. After multiple expert reviews, it was republished the following year, but the section for Montenegro remained blank.

A HIGHER THRESHOLD OF TOLERANCE!?

In the reasoning of the judgment in Martinović’s case, it is stated that freedom of expression is one of the fundamental rights in a democratic society. The court „particularly took into account the fact that Martinović is a civil activist who publicly expresses political views, and that he is one of the founders of an organization, thereby confirming that he participates in public, social, and political life, and thus found that the plaintiff is a public figure“.

- In the opinion of the Court, it is clear that the plaintiff, as a public figure, had to possess a significantly higher threshold of tolerance than persons who have no connection with public appearances… - the reasoning of the first-instance decision states, among other things.

Judge Vuksanović also referred to Article 46 of the Law on Media of Montenegro, stating that journalists and media „are not liable for damages if the information was published in good faith and in accordance with professional standards of journalism, if there were reasonable grounds to believe in the truthfulness of the published information, and if there was a justified public interest for the public to be informed“.

She believes there is no evidence that Jovanović and Tomović acted with the intent to harm Martinović’s reputation, nor that they published information they knew to be untrue.

- On the contrary, from the content of the disputed statements it follows that they were made within the framework of journalistic analysis and public debate on social phenomena - Judge Vuksanović stated.

According to her decision, Jovanović and Tomović did not exceed the permissible limits of the guaranteed freedom of expression, i.e., „they did not disturb the balance that must exist between that freedom and every individual’s right to protection of their honor and reputation“.

Vuksanović also pointed out that Jovanović and Tomović did not aim to defame or insult Martinović on a personal basis, that, as a public figure, he had to have a higher threshold of tolerance compared to an „ordinary citizen“ who does not appear in public, that he must accept criticism in a harsher, even provocative form; and that the defendants’ statements primarily related to his conduct in a professional capacity.

- The disputed reports that are the subject of the claim, in the opinion of the Court, do not represent an expression of personal animosity by the defendants, but are directed at his professional engagement as one of the founders of the fan group Ultra Crna Gora - the judgment states.

TWO CLAIMS REJECTED, ONE UPHELD

In Podgorica, this is the third first-instance ruling. Lawsuits filed by Martinović and civil activist Nebojša Mrvaljević were dismissed as unfounded, while journalist and activist Tanja Pavićević, unlike them, succeeded in her claim against Jovanović and Tomović.

The harshly targeted activists and journalists also filed lawsuits against BIRN before a court in Sarajevo, and all cases decided so far at first instance have been ruled in their favor, while one proceeding is still ongoing.

In addition to Martinović, Mrvaljević, and Pavićević, Jovanović and Tomović also labeled as extremists journalist Kaćuša Krsmanović and civil activists Tatjana Knežević Perišić, Tijana Lopičić, Maja Miličković, Aleksandar Saša Zeković and Predrag Peđa Vušurović.