The International Press Institute (IPI), a global network of editors, media executives and leading journalists for press freedom, today joined calls for the Special Prosecutor’s Office in Serbia to take over the investigation into the murder of journalist Milan Pantić.

Pantić, a correspondent at the daily newspaper Vecernje Novosti, was killed with a blunt object by unknown individuals outside his home in the city of Jagodina in central Serbia on June 11, 2001, sparking outrage across the country.

Despite repeated commitments from successive governments and several different police working groups investigating the killing, 19 years later no one has been charged or prosecuted, adding to a continuing climate of impunity for attacks on journalists in Serbia.

To mark the anniversary of his death, IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen supported the latest call by the Commission for the Investigation of the Murders of Journalists for the highest public prosecutor’s office in Serbia to take over the case and open a renewed investigation.

“Almost two decades have now passed since Milan Pantić was brutally murdered in apparent connection to his work”, Griffen said. “A decision to assign the case to the Special Prosecutor’s Office would add much needed impetus into the investigation and send a clear signal that the Serbian authorities are serious about bringing those responsible for the murder of journalists to justice.”

Fresh investigation needed

Pantić is one of three journalists suspected to have been murdered in Serbia during the tumultuous decade spanning the 1990s and early 2000s: Dada Vujasinović in 1994 and Slavko Ćuruvija in 1999.

In 2018, the Commission, an official government body made up of journalists, associations, and representatives from the police and State Security Agency, called upon authorities to assign the Special Prosecutor to take over the case. It says it never received an official response.

In a statement on June 7, Veran Matić, chairman of the Commission and a veteran Serbian journalist, again pushed for greater efforts to bring those responsible to justice and called for the Special Prosecutor’s Office to publicly respond to their request.

The Commission believes Pantić was killed due to his journalistic investigations into allegedly corrupt privatization deals in Serbia that followed the fall of Slobodan Milosevic’s authoritarian regime and the subsequent transition to democracy at the turn of the century. Prior to his murder the journalist had received several threats over the telephone in response to articles.

According to the Commission, which has followed the case since its establishment in 2013, the long-term investigation by police working groups and judicial authorities in Jagodina was seriously flawed. It says that important material evidence was not preserved, and that important investigative actions were not carried out correctly or at all. This means that while the motive and suspects have been identified, currently there is not enough evidence to bring charges.

“In 2001, Pantic believed that Serbia was a democratic state in which journalists were allowed to cover the circumstances under which important state affairs were carried out, as well as to point out the suspicious activities of important state officials”, Matic said. “That misconception cost him his life. It is our duty to prove to an honest and professional journalist that justice, although slow, is achievable.”

In recent years, exhaustive investigations led to guilty verdicts for those suspected of planning and carrying out the fatal shooting in 1999 of journalist Slavko Ćuruvija, editor and owner of Serbia’s first independent daily newspaper Dnevni Telegraf and the weekly magazine Evropljanin. In 2019, four former Serbian spies were sentenced to prison for between 30 and 20 years for the murder.

In 2000, IPI named Matić one of its 50 World Press Freedom Heroes of the last fifty years.

Novinarki KRIK-a Bojani Pavlović sinoć je oko deset sati nepoznati muškarac oduzeo je telefon nakon što je fotografisala sina predsednika Srbije Danila Vučića kako u društvu Aleksandra Vidojevića, huligana bliskog kavačkom klanu, gleda fudbalski derbi. Ovo se dogodilo u prisustvu policajaca koji nisu reagovali. Posle kraće rasprave, uz odobrenje Vidojevića, telefon joj je vraćen. KRIK zahteva od Ministarstva unutrašnjih poslova da utvrdi i kaže ko su ljudi koji su novinarki oduzeli telefon. 

Nakon što je čitalac KRIK-a redakciji javio da je video predsednikovog sina u društvu huligana iz „Janjičara”, novinarka je otišla do kafića „Piazza dei Fiori“ na Cvetnom trgu, u strogom centru Beograda, malo pre deset sati večeras.

Tamo je Danilo Vučić zaista sedeo u društvu Aleksandra Vidojevića, zvanog Aca Rošavi, i još nekoliko muškaraca i gledali su derbi između Zvezde i Partizana na ekranu u kafiću. Vidojević je, inače, član Partizanove navijačke grupe „Janjičari“ i trenutno mu se sudi da je sa huliganima iz ove grupe demolirao noćni klub „Komitet“. U bazi policije Srbije vodi se i kao član crnogorskog kavačkog klana.

Novinarka KRIK-a je u tom društvu prepoznala i Nemanju Srećkovića, zvanog Kurta, takođe člana ove huliganske skupine.

Ona je sa ulice kroz izlog fotografisala ovo društvo, ali su je po odlasku, u Ulici Svetozara Markovića ispred libanskog restorana brze hrane „Hanan“ zaustavila trojica muškaraca koji su se predstavili kao službena lica. Pavlović se takođe predstavila i pokazala novinarsku legitimaciju, ali su joj rekli da mora da sačeka policijsku patrolu i da će biti privedena.

Zahtevali su da sa telefona obriše fotografije jer, kako su rekli, „mogu da imaju problema“. Policajcima su se pridružila još dvojica muškaraca, koji nisu delovali kao policajci, niti su se tako predstavili.

Novinarka je rekla da je na zadatku i tražila da pozove urednika, a jedan od novopridošlih oteo joj je telefon iz ruke na šta policajci nisu reagovali. Posle insistiranja da joj kažu zbog čega joj je oduzeto sredstvo za rad, čovek koji je to uradio je rekao da ne mora ništa da objašnjava jer je civil.

Grupi su zatim prišli Vidojević i Srećković, a policajci su tada otišli. Vidojević je rekao da novinarki vrate telefon, što su oni učinili. Rekao je novinarki da mu KRIK, tekstovima koje o njemu objavljuje, ugrožava život. Nakon toga su otišli.

KRIK zahteva od Ministarstva unutrašnjih poslova da utvrdi i kaže ko su ljudi koji su novinarki oduzeli telefon i zbog čega policajci na to nisu reagovali.

Apeluje na državu da novinarima, koji su sve više izloženi pritiscima, omogući da nesmetano rade svoj posao.

Druženje predsednikovog sina i Vidojevića

Ovo je već četvrti put da su Danilo Vučić i Vidojević viđeni zajedno u javnosti.

Svi njihovi susreti, od navijanja u Rusiji na Svetskom prvenstvu u fudbalu, preko zajedničkog obležavanja Dana Republike Srpske i druženja u noćnom klubu, do večerašnjeg gledanja utakmice, govore o njihovoj bliskosti.

Nejasno je, međutim, zbog čega se predsednikov sin druži sa čovekom kojem se trenutno sudi i kojeg policija povezuje sa crnogorskim kriminalnim klanom.

Predsednik Aleksandar Vučić nikad ovo nije objasnio u javnosti. Umesto toga, kada su novinari KRIK-a nedavno objavili jednu od Vučićevih i Vidojevićevih fotografija, ustali su vodeći državni funkcioneri koji su javno napali KRIK da „kriminalizuje“ Danila Vučića, proglašava ga za „narko-bosa“ i ugrožava mu život.

By: Vanja Ibrahimbegović Tihak

“Media must be free to report on all aspects of the crisis. Journalists have a key role and a special responsibility for providing timely, accurate and reliable information to the public. They must be able to scrutinize the decisions of authorities in response to the pandemic. Through responsible reporting, journalists can also help prevent panic from spreading and highlight positive examples of solidarity in our societies. I have been personally impressed and encouraged by the many media reports I have seen of citizens helping each other and of carers, nurses, doctors and other ‘heroes’ on the frontline of this crisis.” These were the words of Marija Pejčinović Burić, Council of Europe Secretary General, delivered on World Press Freedom Day (Svjetski dan slobode medija), during the peak of Corona virus pandemics. She reminded the audience about the fundamental principles of freedom of expression and demanded responsibility by both, Council of Europe State Members and media professionals, outlining that they should preserve and sustain their own professional standards, as well as to cherish human rights.

Abuse of Human Rights Convention

As short reminder, we should outline here that Article 10 of the Human Rights Convention (Evropske konvencije o ljudskim pravima), defined fundamental protection standards concerning the rights to freedom of expression, guaranteed to all citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina. And they are awarded and evolved through court practice by the European Court of Human Rights and through declarations, recommendations and guidelines issued by the Council of Europe, which again, derived from the very same applicable practice. During the past period, Guidelines on Media Reporting during the Crisis (Smjernice o medijskom izvještavanju u vrijeme krize) from 2007 have been reactivated and these are available in all three constitutional languages in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The Guidelines clearly define that member states shall ensure and provide free access to information which is in public interest; they must not misuse crisis situation in order to, by any means applicable, limit both female and male media representatives to have free access to information (including, for instance, defamation charges); competent governing official authorities shall not discriminate, but instead they shall provide free access to information to all media representatives and they shall not limit freedom of expression in regard with Article 10.

In this context, it is important to have full comprehension and understanding of Article 10 where any limiting of freedom of expression, imposed by the governing official authorities, must be in proportion with threats to other rights or freedoms, which again is in conflict with freedom of expression. In simple terms, this means that should governing official authorities decide that certain information, considered as public importance, is hidden from the public (if this should occur during specific period of time and associated with the argument that it represents common good), they (governing official authorities) must be certain that the damage and danger deriving from releasing such information (at certain period of time), is greater than omitting to release the same information and share it with the public. However, it does not mean that governing official authorities may randomly pass these kinds of decisions. There is specific and well – defined criteria based upon which those decisions are estimated and evaluated (test of proportionality) since they apply to every single individual case. What is important to highlight here is the fact that freedom of expression, in accordance with the Convention is the rule and limitations, represent exceptions that should be justified.

Some decisions passed by the governing official authorities, that is, institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the context of reducing the consequences of corona virus pandemics, demonstrated either fundamental ignorance of the above mentioned principles or they displayed a complete abuse. During the period when this particular article was written down, when one would believe that the pandemics was decreasing and declining, more and more analysis seem to have been appearing in public, confirming how BiH institutions, in their attempt and enormous effort and to repress pandemics, actually violated human rights (analiza o tome kako su institucije BiH u pokušaju suzbijanja pandemije kršile ljudska prava).

For instance, it is important to remind the audience about the decision passed by the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (odluke Ustavnog suda Bosne i Hercegovine), outlining that banning underage and senior citizens from leaving their homes did represent violation of human rights in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, because the conditions of proportionality had not been fully met. Namely, without taking weaker measure into consideration (for instance, partial restrictions respectively) that may have been equally efficient, and on the other hand, they would thus allow underage and senior citizens to have certain liberties, the Federal institutions instead decided to impose most strict restrictions immediately, where they completely ignored the rule of proportionality, which again clearly violated human rights.

Freedom of expression had been similarly violated. One of many cases supporting this thesis was the decision passed by the Government of the Republic of Srpska (Odluka Vlade Republike Srpske), concerning the ban on encouraging and instigating public panic and disorder on the territory of the Republic of Srpska during the state of emergency period. The decision banned “revealing, releasing, exposing, posting or sharing false news or allegations that may cause panic or severely violate public peace and order or disallow or significantly disturb or obstruct the implementation of decisions and measures imposed by the governing official authorities and organizations executing public empowerments” . From the protection of freedom of expression point of view, there is a whole line of problematic elements in this decision. For example, who would, in what way and how decide which “allegations” would result in mass public panic or obstruct the decisions and measures implemented by the governing official authorities and public bodies. This would indeed eventually leave a wide open space and area for the abuse and illegal limiting of the freedom of expression. After public reactions, including those by the BH Journalists (BH novinara), the Government of the Republic of Srpska, and a month after this controversial decision had been passed, put this decision out of force (van snage). There were similar cases including those pursuant with the Provision passed by the President of the Republic of Srpska; including also the decision passed by the Emergency Staff of the Stari Grad Municipal official authorities, again concerning the ban of revealing, releasing, exposing, posting or sharing false news.

Pressure on media

Also, there were cases where the police (policija oduzima snimke), by using force, took video recordings from accredited journalists’ team and delete them; or cases where medical institutions would openly favor particular media houses (zdravstvena ustanova  favorizira određene medije) and particular journalists, while they would, at the same time, ban others from having free access to information that concerned public health situation or cases where Cantonal Emergency Staff, apparently due to the ban of social gatherings, disallowing thus public press conference (kantonalni krizni štab pod krinkom zabrane okupljanja onemogućuje održavanje press konferencije), that should contain information about epidemics and we all witnessed this occurrence in Bosnia and Herzegovina during first two months of corona virus crisis, since these were all in contrast with the principles and standards regarding the protection of freedom of expression, that, pursuant to European Convention of Human Rights. These principles must be obeyed by the state. In case of our country, and if we should judge by the above listed cases and examples, we could only conclude that this obligation had never been obeyed by the state officials as it should have been; instead pressure imposed on media representatives had at the same time become a raw model of conduct.

Without any intention to speculate the reasons of such conduct (displayed by the institution female and male representatives), whose primary goal was the protection of rights and liberties, the purpose of this article / text was to warn the general public audience about the standards of the Council of Europe and refer to their present / current practical application, all in accordance with the Constitution and laws of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Piše: Vanja Ibrahimbegović Tihak

„Mediji moraju imati slobodu da izvještavaju o svim aspektima krize. Ključna uloga i odgovornost novinara i novinarki jest da javnosti predoče pravovremene, tačne i pouzdane informacije. Oni moraju biti slobodni da propituju i kritiziraju odluke koje vlade donose u pogledu borbe protiv pandemije. A kroz odgovorno izvještavanje mogu i trebaju pomoći u sprečavanju panike, naglašavajući pozitivne primjere solidarnosti.“ Ovako je u jeku pandemije korona virusa, na Svjetski dan slobode medija, generalna sekretarka Vijeća Evrope Marija Pejčinović Burić podsjećala na principe zaštite slobode izražavanja i pozivala na odgovornost, kako države članice Vijeća Evrope, tako i medijske profesionalce, da čuvajući vlastite profesionalne standarde čuvaju ljudska prava svih.

Zloupotreba Konvencije o ljudskim pravima

Kao kratko podsjećanje treba napomenuti da su u Članu 10 Evropske konvencije o ljudskim pravima, definirani osnovni standardi zaštite prava na slobodu izražavanja, zagarantiranog građanima i građankama Bosne i Hercegovine. A oni se nadgrađuju i evoluiraju kroz sudsku praksu Evropskog suda za ljudska prava, te kroz deklaracije, preporuke i smjernice Vijeća Evrope koje proističu iz te prakse. U prethodnom periodu reaktaulizirane su Smjernice o medijskom izvještavanju u vrijeme krize iz 2007. godine, koje su dostupne na B-H-S jezicima.

U smjernicama se naglašava kako države članice trebaju osigurati slobodan pristup informacijama koje su u interesu javnosti; ne smiju koristiti krizne situacije kako bi na bilo koji način ograničili predstavnicima i predstavnicama medija pristup tim informacijama (uključujući na primjer optužbe za klevetu); kompetentne vlasti neke države neće diskriminirati, nego će omogućiti slobodan pristup informacijama svim medijima; te neće ograničavati slobodu izražavanja dodatno u odnosu na Član 10.

U tom je kontekstu važno razumjeti da prema Članu 10, svako ograničavanje slobode izražavanja koje država nameće, mora biti proporcionalno prijetnji drugom pravu ili slobodi, koje je u sukobu sa slobodom izražavanja. Pojednostavljeno, to znači da ako će vlast odlučiti da neku informaciju od javnog značaja sakrije od javnosti (čak i ako je to samo na određeno vrijeme i sa argumentom da je to za opće dobro), mora biti sigurna da je šteta i opasnost od objavljivanja te informacije u datom momentu, veća prijetnja po javnu sigurnost od njenog neobjavljivanja. Ali to ne znači da vlasti mogu paušalno i unaprijed donositi ovakve odluke. Postoje tačno određeni kriteriji prema kojima se ta odluka procjenjuje (test proporcionalnosti), za svaki pojedinačni slučaj. Ono što je ovdje važno naglasiti jeste da je sloboda izražavanja prema Konvenciji pravilo, a ograničenja su iznimke koje treba opravdati.

Neke od odluka koje su institucije u Bosni i Hercegovini donosile u kontekstu suzbijanja posljedica pandemije korona virusa, demonstrirale su ili suštinsko nerazumijevanje navedenog principa, ili zloupotrebu. U vrijeme nastanka ovog teksta, kad se čini da je pandemija u opadajućoj putanji, pojavljuje se sve više analiza o tome kako su institucije BiH u pokušaju suzbijanja pandemije kršile ljudska prava. Kao primjer važno je prisjetiti se i odluke Ustavnog suda Bosne i Hercegovine, u kojoj se navodi da su zabranom kretanja maloljetnim i starijim osobama u Federaciji Bosne i Hercegovine prekršena ljudska prava, zbog neispunjavanja uvjeta proporcionalnosti. Naime, bez razmatranja blažih mjera (na primjer djelomičnih restrikcija), koje bi možda bile jednako efikasne, a ostavile bi određene slobode maloljetnim i starijim osobama, institucije FBiH su odmah išle na najoštrije mjere, čime su ignorirale pravilo proporcionalnosti, što predstavlja kršenje prava.

Na sličan način kršena je sloboda izražavanja. Jedan od primjera je Odluka Vlade Republike Srpske o zabrani izazivanja panike i nereda na teritoriji Republike Srpske u vrijeme trajanja vanrednog stanja, kojom se zabranjuje „iznošenje ili prenošenje lažnih vijesti ili tvrđenja kojima se izaziva panika ili teže narušava javni red ili mir ili onemogućava ili značajnije ometa sprovođenje odluka i mjera državnih organa i organizacija koji vrše javna ovlašćenja“. S aspekta zaštite slobode izražavanja niz je problematičnih elemenata u ovoj odluci. Na primjer ko bi, kad i kako odlučivao o tome koje  „tvrđenje“ izaziva paniku ili ometa sprovođenje odluka i mjera državnih organa. Ovo ostavlja dosta širok prostor za zloupotrebu i nezakonito ograničavanje slobode izražavanja. Nakon javnih reakcija, među ostalim i BH novinara, Vlada RS-a je, oko mjesec dana nakon donošenja, ovu odluku stavila van snage. Slični su primjeri i Uredba predsjednice RS, kao i odluka kriznog štaba Općine Stari Grad Sarajevo, opet o zabrani iznošenja i prenošenja lažnih vijesti.

Pritisci na medije

Također, slučajevi gdje policija oduzima snimke akreditiranoj novinarskoj ekipi i briše ih, te im onemogućuje da izvještavaju; ili gdje zdravstvena ustanova  favorizira određene medije i novinare, a drugima zabranjuje pristup informacijama koje se tiču javnog zdravlja; ili gdje  kantonalni krizni štab pod krinkom zabrane okupljanja onemogućuje održavanje press konferencije na kojoj se iznose informacije o epidemiji; kojima smo svjedočili u Bosni i Hercegovini tokom prva dva mjeseca krize korona virusa, u direktnoj su suprotnosti sa principima i standardima zaštite slobode izražavanja, koje su prema Evropskoj konvenciji za ljudska prava, obaveza države. U slučaju naše zemlje, ako je suditi po navedenim primjerima, može se ustvrditi ne samo da nije adekvatno odgovorila ovoj obavezi, nego da su pritisci na medije obrazac ponašanja.

Ne ulazeći u špekuliranje o razlozima za ovakvo ponašanje predstavnika i predstavnica institucija čiji je zadatak zaštita prava i sloboda, namjera ovog teksta je još jednom skrenuti pažnju na standarde Vijeća Evrope i pozvati na njihovu dosljednu primjenu, u skladu sa Ustavom i zakonima Bosne i Hercegovine.

(Tekst je objavljen u 75. broju biltena E-novinar u okviru projekta JUFREX koji podržava Vijeće Evrope)

Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije izražava duboko žaljenje jer su počinioci i nalogodavci ubistva kolege Milana Pantića i dalje na slobodi i nepoznati javnosti te poziva nadležne organe da preduzmu maksimalne napore da se ovaj slučaj rasvetli nakon 19 godina od nemilog događaja.

Tomorrow, the awards for investigative journalism will be handed out by the Independent Association of Journalists of Serbia (IJAS) with the support of the U.S. Embassy in Belgrade. It will happen on the day when journalist Milan Pantic, a correspondent of “Večernje novosti” from Jagodina, was killed.

…

I looked at the shortlisted nominees and whoever gets it, deserves it.
List of nominations:

http://www.nuns.rs/info/activities/48613/u-uzem-izboru-za-nagradu-za-istrazivacko-novinarstvo-dejan-anastasijevic-devet-istrazivackih-radova.html  

The Award was postponed this year due to pandemic, and it will be held on Thursday in the Media Center instead at the Faculty of Dramatic Arts.

http://www.nuns.rs/info/activities/48712/dodela-nagrada-za-istrazivacko-novinarstvo-dejan-anastasijevic-2020.html

As of this year, the award is named after our colleague Dejan Anastasijevic, who left us too early. Since these days, I have paid attention to the impunity of the murders of journalists, and violence against journalists, and certainly right after the murders of Dada, Slavko and Milan Pantic, one of the most serious unsolved cases of violence against journalists, was the assassination attempt on Dejan and his family.

I knew Dejan well, as I have closely cooperated with him throughout his professional life. Our private lives were also rather intertwined.

On B92, we nicknamed him Ananas (Pineapple in English). All of a sudden, I am faced with the information that he also has the “nickname” of Haji (Hadzija in Serbian).

Hadžija, or Haji (Arab اجٍّ‎‎, “Pilgrim“), is an honorary title given to Muslims who have performed the hajj, or pilgrimage to Mecca. In a figurative sense, the term is sometimes used for people who have distinguished themselves by some great achievement, that is, they enjoy authority/respect in the community.

In the police administration, the case of the assassination attempt on Dejan Anastasijevic and his family, which took place on April 14, 2007, is codenamed “Hadzija/Haji“. I thought it was a vision of a police investigator or administrator, in accordance with his perception of Dejan, but I soon realized that the name was inspired by Haji Djerina Street where Dejan lived. However, Dejan was certainly a pilgrim, as defined by Wikipedia…

He started his career on Radio B92 in the comic book show “Cloudlet” (“Oblačić”), it was a kind of radio comic, which is not strange because we also had a photo section in Rhythm of the Heart, a radio show. He was one of the wise guys, dedicated to culture and phenomena. While working at B92, he was not interested in politics. By moving to weekly Vreme, he very quickly established himself as a reporter, an investigative journalist, who dealt with the most difficult topics. Along with weekly Vreme, he also worked for many foreign media, as well as acorrespondent from Brussels, and his last engagement was for the BBC Serbian Service. Like other journalists who reported from Kosovo, following the conflicts and crimes, he experienced persecution, and after testifying in The Hague, the demonization reached its peak.

In addition to all these events, after the assassination attempt on him and his family, the then Minister of Police Dragan Jocic commented that his case was difficult to solve because the motive for the attack could not be determined. This could only be said by a cynic or someone who did not bother to look at the texts published by Dejan Anastasijevic – starting withScorpio criminal group, whose monstrous crime was discovered and made known through a video of crimes against Muslims they committed themselves, through war crimes indictees in The Hague, perpetrators of crimes committed in Kosovo…

When I received police protection 24/7, it was explained to me that it is necessary because of the overall activity, because of the accumulated threats and events, according to which it can be assumed that my life might be endangered. The intercepted communications between criminals and fan groups in which my name came up, only speeded up the action.

Dejan himself said in some of his statements that the assassination attempt was related to his overall actions… However, provoked by the attitude of the Minister of Police, in weekly Vreme on October 18, 2007, he wrote an article entitled “Who put bombs on my window”: “I admit that I do not have enough evidence to accuse anyone, but I think there are enough indications to conclude that the attack on me and my family came from the same political-police underground that survived October 5 and “Saber” without major problems. It is the stone under which the state must not peek, in order not to disturb the scorpions that are most beautiful in the dark. What follows is a simple enumeration of the facts that I think are relevant, from the description of the events, to the subsequent knowledge of the motives and political background. Readers will be able to draw their own conclusions“. Read the text, there’s much more information there than in the police investigation.

https://www.vreme.com/cms/view.php?id=516448

This text should become part of the curriculum for all journalists, but also for all those who want to deal with any kind of activism, politics, etc.

…

When one hears from those who worked on the case, it will be understood that everything that President Tadicpromised immediately after the assassination, no one heard in the base, or the instruction between the different levels of the government was redirected: do nothing, while simulating doing something. Checks were made on reports that someone had heard something, that someone had bragged about something, that maybe they were Scorpios… Of course they all denied, they went through polygraphs, there was no DNA match…

I believe that all such cases must undergo independent revisions, because the imperative of such events is their successful resolution. Not only that we haven’t got a solution here, but we also had an explanation from the Minister of Police himself as to why there would not be one. The fate of Serbia is determined by such symbols:Seselj who dominates the social scene of Serbia with all the evil represented by his political career, other convicted criminals being proclaimed heroes, unpunished murderers of journalists who livedpeacefully in their luxury.

I was in the courtyard of the Vreme editorial office the day after the assassination attempt on Dejan, when President Boris Tadic came and promised that everything would be done. Upon leaving that event, I couldn’t get rid of the feeling that simply overwhelmed me: the beer adds that dominated the scene on the umbrellas above the tables. In reality, one minister soon claimed that they had no motive, and the other Minister of Information, Kojadinovic, said that the problem was in the fact that his colleague Anastasijeviclived on the ground floor, so that is why a bomb was planted easily…

This case of assassination attempt must be further investigated.

I can regretfully notice that I no longer see the determination to insist on that case coming from ourjournalistic profession.

We were often naive to believe, like Dejan did, that one day (especially two decades after October 5), it will be normal that the show dedicated to the NUNS Award for investigative journalism will be aired on the public service in

prime time, acquainting general public with the works of nominated investigative journalists. No government has established this as an unwritten rule for the past twenty years. That is why such programs could only be aired on B92, B92 info,  back then, and now on N1, and in fact mostly in online media and press. It is the indisputable public interest that, based on the Law on Public Information and the Law on Public Media Services, should be fulfilled by the local public media services.

The awards will be presented, and indeed both those who receive them and the nominees will be proud.

Why shouldn’t that pride be shared by the entire community in Serbia, no matter how painful the findings of the journalist’s research are when they become general knowledge? Truths can have a healing effect if we recognize that we need that healing. Living in a lie can be seemingly easier, but we are paying for the consequences permanently. And the price is getting higher when it comes to the future. And it is usually inversely proportional to impunity.

Here’s some facts for those who hate to be reminded of them:

On April 4, 2007, at around 2.45 am, in Haji DjerinaStreet No. 14, at Vracar Municipality, under the metal drip of the bedroom window of the apartment (located on the ground floor of a residential building) owned by Dejan Anastasijevic, born on April 10, 1962, a hand grenade exploded. At the moment of the explosion, Dejan’s wife was also in the apartment with Dejan.Later, Dejan stated that he was lucky that his daughter was returning from nightlife late.

An unexploded M50 bomb was found on the street,about ten meters from the explosion, partiallydamaged. A hand grenade number … was found nearby. It is assumed that the perpetrator planted two bombs, one of which exploded and the other hadn’t, damaged by the explosion of the first one. Dejan and his wife slept in the room on which window the explosive device was planted and thanks to the fact that the bed was shielded from the direction of the bomb explosion, they remained alive.