Curuvija Foundation Must Pay Those Once Accused of His Murder
A first-instance court ruled that the Slavko Curuvija Foundation must pay more than a million dinars to three former security service members acquitted of the 1999 murder of the journalist.
- A Belgrade court ruled the Slavko Curuvija Foundation must pay 1,035,000 dinars.
- The money goes to three former security service members acquitted of Curuvija's murder.
- They sued the Foundation over a statement about their acquittal.
- The Foundation has announced an appeal, and the family calls the ruling absurd.
The Second Basic Court in Belgrade has issued a first-instance ruling ordering the Slavko Curuvija Foundation to pay a total of 1,035,000 dinars to three former members of the State Security Service, Miroslav Kurak, Ratko Romic and Milan Radonjic. Each was awarded 200,000 dinars for honour and reputation, plus around 435,000 dinars in court costs.
The three plaintiffs filed the case against the Foundation in 2024, over a statement in which the Foundation expressed dissatisfaction with the Court of Appeal’s decision to acquit them of the murder of journalist and Dnevni telegraf owner Slavko Curuvija. Curuvija was killed in front of his building in central Belgrade on 11 April 1999.
How did the Foundation end up paying the accused?
The criminal proceedings over the murder itself lasted nearly a decade. In two first-instance verdicts, Kurak, Romic, Radonjic and former State Security chief Radomir Markovic were sentenced to a combined total of around 100 years in prison. The Court of Appeal then issued an acquittal, citing a lack of sufficient evidence.
After the acquittal, the three former officers sued the Foundation that bears the murdered journalist’s name, because it had publicly said it was dissatisfied with that outcome. The court has now taken the position that this statement damaged their honour and reputation.
What does this mean for freedom of expression?
Jelena Curuvija, the daughter of the murdered journalist, called the ruling absurd and proof of the collapse of the judiciary. The Association of Independent Electronic Media said it was a serious blow to freedom of expression, because it punishes a critical stance toward a court decision.
The Foundation has announced an appeal against the first-instance ruling. Twenty-seven years after the murder, it raises the question of how those once accused of the crime can now collect money from the institution that preserves the memory of the victim. Do you think the appeal will overturn this decision?
