The Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung (FAZ) states that it has had insight into the court's decision and writes that the Land Court in Hamburg has issued a temporary executive measure prohibiting the German magazine Spiegel from calling the President of Serbia Aleksandar Vučić he is suspected of participating in an alleged "manhunt" during the siege Sarajevo.
According to the court's decision, the magazine must not create the impression that Vučić participated in the targeted killing of civilians during the war from 1992 to 1995, writes FAZ. writes DW.
If Spiegel violates this ban and continues to spread the disputed claims from the text published in March of this year under the title "Rich Europeans who traveled to Sarajevo to hunt people", he faces a fine of up to 250.000 euros.
Court: Inadmissible and unbalanced reporting
According to the author Michael Martens, the Hamburg court did not challenge Spiegel that there is an exceptional public interest in this topic, given that it is the head of state. However, the three-judge panel found that Spiegel's presentation was inadmissible and unbalanced, and that it grossly violated Vučić's general right to personality.
The court expressly prohibited Spiegel from spreading the claim that Vučić served as a war volunteer in a paramilitary formation at the Jewish cemetery in Sarajevo in his youth and that he allegedly came into contact with foreign "manhunters" there. For the same reasons, the transmission of similar statements by Vojislav Šešelj, as well as the quoting of Kosovo Prime Minister Aljbin Kurti, who requested the establishment of an international court based on those media articles, was prohibited.
Also, Spiegel is no longer allowed to use quotes from the alleged war minutes from August 1992, presented to the public by Croatian journalist Domagoj Margetić, which suggested that "volunteer Vučić" was given a rifle at that time. The court also banned the use of a rhetorical question describing Vučić as a "former assistant in deadly activities in Sarajevo."
Rule of presumption of innocence violated
In their explanation, the Hamburg judges pointed out that Spiegel did not meet the basic requirements for legally permitted reporting on suspicions. The court emphasized that serious accusations and ongoing investigative procedures in the early stages do not legally prove guilt, and that due to the presumption of innocence, journalists must provide a firm minimum of evidentiary facts before destroying someone's reputation.
Spiegel presented the disputed details as his own knowledge, without even contacting Vučić beforehand in order to take his statement and comment on the accusations.
Because of these omissions, the court determined that Spiegel must bear all the costs of the proceedings, which the magazine has the right to appeal to a higher instance. The editorial office of Spiegel confirmed to FAZ that they had received the ban and stated that they would adjust their actions, but added that they still stand behind their research.
Question book and the "tell-tell" principle
In the analysis of the whole case, FAZ journalist Michael Martens points out that the whole story about rich Westerners who paid to shoot civilians from the hills around Sarajevo actually revolves around the book "Weekend snipers" (I cecchini del weekend) by the Italian author Ezio Gavaceni. On the basis of that book, several European prosecutor's offices did launch preliminary investigations, which served as the reason for Spiegel's text.
However, Martens points out that the Italian author himself proudly admits that during the writing of the book he was never even in Sarajevo. According to FAZ, his work is just a compilation of unverified rumors, without a single solid proof or verified source - which in the Balkans is described as classic "rekla-kazala".
Western media accepted these insinuations for granted simply because the story sounded tempting, without asking critical questions.
Belgrade is not Hamburg.
Martens concludes that there is more than enough material and indisputable evidence about Vučić's political role and Serbian crimes during the war in the 1990s, including his infamous and recorded statement from 1995 that "for one killed Serb, he will kill 100 Muslims." However, claims that the current president of Serbia was involved in some kind of commercial "safari" on people have no basis in fact.
While Vučić managed to win a legal victory in Germany, FAZ eventually notes that his political opponents in Serbia itself do not have that privilege. The Serbian opposition faces systematic slander every day in pro-regime tabloids like Informer or on Happy TV, where going to court has become a futile legal odyssey due to the complete nonsense of the presumption of innocence, because Belgrade is not Hamburg after all.
Real journalism costs money, and we will not be bought by tycoons and corporations. Support us with a one-time or monthly donation. The time for it is now!
