Monthly Monitoring Highlights – June

During the month of June, the RDN monitoring team identified a range of hateful narratives and discourse on ethnic and religious grounds alongside attacks on journalists and professionals and anti-LGBTQI+ sentiments.

Attack on journalists in Serbia and Montenegro

The month of June for Serbia was one marked by a heightened number of attacks on journalists. One involved journalist Kristina Demeter Filipčev of the bilingual news portal Bečejski mozaik, who received threats of violence and hanging, disturbing messages, insults, incitement of ethnic hatred, brutal sexist threats and messages, and misogynistic content on the portal’s Facebook and Instagram pages following the publication of her report from a public gathering. In another case, following the publication of articles about the alleged illegal sale of buprenorphine in Leskovac, threats were directed at Dragan Marinković, the editor-in-chief and responsible editor of portal Rešetka. The threats came in a video posted online on TikTok which included explicit death threats and intimidation directed at the journalists with references to murder and the disposal of his body including the hiring of people to harm him. Alongside him, Veran Matić, journalist, president of ANEM and the association’s representative in the Permanent working group for the safety of journalists [stalnoj radnoj grupi za bezbednost novinara] was attacked on June 17th in front of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia where his phone was forcefully taken from him while he was recording a public gathering of a few dozen people. N1 journalist Danica Vučenić received a letter threatening her and her loved ones. Moreover, Vladimir Mitrić from Večernje Novosti from Loznica received a death threat via Facebook, referencing the murder of his colleague from Jagodina, Milan Pantić. Furthermore, Maria Popović, editor of local media outlet ‘Pravo u centar’ in Lazarevac and member of ANEM, received a threatening Facebook message from the profile Stojan Marković, whose profile picture shows him wearing a Serbian Army uniform. In another case, the car of David Gruhonjić, the son of journalist Dinko Gruhonjić, was damaged in an act of vandalism by three men wearing balaclavas in Novi Sad.

Furthermore, the Higher Prosecutor’s Office [Više javno tužilaštvo] (VJT) ordered interviewsbe conducted with media workers that reported on the alleged use of a ‘sound cannon’ by the state against protestors on the 15^th of March 2025, in Belgrade in order to understand the origins of such claims. This campaign was amplified by Interior Minister Ivica Dačić whoclaimed that the VJT had exposed a monstrous plan and that “the lie about the sound cannon was a prelude to civil war.” Both statements were amplified through a campaign targeting students, the NGO sector, critical journalists and professional media outlets in pro-government tabloids, led by Informer. As a result, military analyst Aleksandar Radić’s apartment was searched, as well as his wife’s apartment, Beta News Agency director VojkanKostić was delivered a summons for questioning, and Radar weekly’s journalist Milan Radonjić was targeted. Lastly, in another case, three men in plain clothes were intimidating and obstructing the work of journalists from the Centre for Investigative Journalism (CINS) while they were distributing leaflets promoting their latest investigative story about the companies engaged in projects related to the specialised EXPO, set to take place in Belgrade, Serbia next summer. This happened outside the EXPO headquarters on Kralja Milana Street in Belgrade. 

In Montenegro, Journalists Andrea Perišić and Đurđa Radulović of the Center for Investigative Journalism of Montenegro (CIN-CG) became the subject of a criminal complaint filed against them by Ivica Janović, Director of the National Security Agency (ANB), following the publication of an investigative article on personnel policies and security vetting procedures within the agency. After the complaint was filed, the journalists were summoned by the police to give statements and were asked to reveal their sources of information. They refused, invoking their right to protect the confidentiality of journalistic sources. As a result, CIN-CG, along with numerous national and international media organisations, condemned the complaint as an attempt to exert pressure on investigative journalism and to intimidate journalists reporting on matters of public interest.

The National Security Agency (ANB) of Montenegro is one of the country’s most secretive state institutions. Due to the sensitive nature of its intelligence and security work, information about its operations, personnel, internal procedures, and decision-making processes is rarely available to the public. Journalists and civil society organizations have often pointed to the limited transparency of the agency, arguing that greater public oversight is needed to ensure accountability while respecting legitimate national security concerns. Investigative journalists doing their professional work should never be put in harm’s way nor be summoned or investigated and pressured to reveal their sources, thereby putting themselves and their sources at risk. Journalists should be free to do their job in the most professional manner.

Attack on professionals in Albania

On 24 June 2026, Prapaskena.com published an article targeting Blerjana Bino, director of the Center for Science and Innovation for Development (SCiDEV), framing her professional activities and project involvement as a scheme of personal enrichment and misuse of donor funds. The article alleges that Bino distributes project funds among family members, including her partner and relatives, portraying this as systematic abuse and conflict of interest. The narrative is constructed through a mix of publicly available information (such as participation in projects and professional collaborations) and unverified claims, presented in a sensationalist and accusatory tone. The article repeatedly emphasises family relationships, referring to a “family canteen” (“mensa familjare”) and suggesting intentional concealment of marital status to avoid audits. It frames professional collaboration as inherently illegitimate, without presenting substantiated evidence of wrongdoing.

Additionally, the article uses loaded and ironic language to undermine Bino’s credibility, referring to her as a “partizania e barazisë sociale” (partisan of social equality) in a sarcastic tone, and suggesting hypocrisy between her public advocacy and alleged private actions. The text also generalises beyond the individual case, portraying Bino as representative of a broader pattern of corruption within NGOs, claiming that such actors “have swallowed funds” and manipulated systems for personal gain. The inclusion of family members’ names and photos, alongside insinuations of financial misconduct, amplifies the personal dimension of the attack. 

This incident reflects a pattern of reputational targeting through insinuation, selective framing, and personalisation. By presenting allegations as implied facts and combining them with emotionally charged language, the article blurs the line between investigative reporting and defamation. The emphasis on family relationships functions to frame professional collaboration as unethical by default, without contextualizing legal or institutional standards regarding conflict of interest. Furthermore, the use of sarcastic and gendered undertones particularly in framing a woman leader as hypocritical or manipulative contributes to the delegitimisation of women in leadership roles within civil society. Overall, the portrayal of the individual case as emblematic of the entire NGO sector reinforces public distrust and stigmatisation of civil society organizations.

The incident occurred in the context of large-scale public protests proposed tourism and infrastructure developments in environmentally protected areas such as Nartë–Zvërnec and Sazan. These protests brought together a diverse coalition of actors, including residents, environmental organizations, activists, journalists, and political opposition representatives. Within this context, disinformation and hostile rhetoric have been used to discredit various actors involved, deepen divisions among protest groups, and shift focus away from substantive policy debates.

Anti-LGBTQI+ narratives and discourse in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Nihad Aličković, the founder of the “AntiDayton” movement, on the 20th of June, published a post on Facebook stating that the Sarajevo Pride event is an event that should not have been allowed on a date he links to significant wartime sacrifices. He referenced the 20^th of June 1992, describing it as a day when the leadership of the then Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina called for general mobilisation and urged citizens to defend the country. He contrasted this with Pride taking place on 20 June 2026, which he described in highly derogatory terms, accusing authorities and organisers of promoting moral decline. He further claimed that mobilisation during wartime was associated with “real men,” while he contrasted Pride with what he described as “degeneracy” and “debauchery”. He argued that Pride represents humiliation and disgrace and stated that the Pride is a call for “pe***luk” (a very derogatory and harmful slur used towards members of the LGBTQI+ community) 

He also published another post where he announced that a mass gathering would be organised next year to oppose the holding of the Pride Parade in Sarajevo. However, the post has since been deleted. 

The comparison of the two dates and events is extremely inappropriate in this case, furthermore, using this as a stepping stone argument to spread homophobia and anti-LGBTQI+ narratives is equally very harmful and wrong. Pride represents a time for the gathering and celebration of queerness and the LGBTQI+ community. Every person regardless of their sexual orientation, should be given the space and freedom to celebrate who they are without being attacked or undermined on social media or in real life. 

Ethnic discrimination in Kosovo

Serbs from Kosovo and across the region gathered at Gazimestan to mark Vidovdan (St. Vitus Day), a national and religious holiday which is associated with the 1389 Battle of Kosovo. Participants first gathered at the Gračanica Monastery before proceeding to Gazimestan, a historic site located in the municipality of Obilić (Obiliq/Kastriot).

Following the conclusion of the pilgrimage, police detained several participants on suspicion of failing to comply with regulations prohibiting the incitement of hatred. The Kosovo Police stated that, after the Vidovdan commemoration, they interviewed 37 individuals suspected of provoking those present by chanting provocative slogans containing elements of hate incitement.

All of those detained were subsequently released. Some individuals who did not possess Kosovo-issued identification documents were banned from entering Kosovo for three years. The remaining individuals were issued fines of €700, payable within 15 days. Their documents were temporarily confiscated until the fines are paid. 

As Radio Free Europe reported, after their arrest, allegations appeared in the public that they were subjected to physical and psychological abuse by several policemen, who slapped, beat, insulted and humiliated them, and forced them to chant “Kosovo Republic”.

In response, the Ombudsman of Kosovo, decided to launch an ex officio investigation into allegations of abuse by police officers of the arrested during the celebration in Gazimestan. This came because of the various complaints received from several citizens and information sent by various non-governmental organisations, as well as collected information from the media. The EU spokesperson, as well as EULEX Kosovo, also reacted. The investigation includes a look into complaints received from citizens arrested by Kosovo Police and their exposure to physical and psychological violence during their transportation to the local police station. This kind of behaviour violates the rights guaranteed to citizens by the Constitution and laws in place. Likewise, the Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR) from Serbia and Kosovo came out and noted that the violations of the rights of members of the Serbian community in Kosovo and of the Albanian community in Serbia reveal that the normalisation of relationships between the two countries will never be possible without the consistent protection of minority rights. Both organisations called on governments to stop discrimination, hate speech and ethnically motivated incidents. 

Islamophobia in North Macedonia

The city swimming pool in Tetovo has introduced special time slots during which only women and girls are allowed to use the pool. These sessions are scheduled on Wednesdays and Saturdays from 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

“These time slots are intended for use only by women and girls because they did not want to share the pool with men. This was introduced at the request of the citizens – specifically, women citizens- of Tetovo,” said Nazmi Dauti, Head of the Public Affairs Department of the Municipality of Tetovo. 

In response however, Skopje1.mk published a Facebook post using more tendentious language, stating: “Like in Saudi Arabia: only Tuesdays and Saturdays women can bathe in the swimming pool in Tetovo.”  This type of headline might spur on hate speech or discriminatory language towards this decision. By comparing the new measure to Saudi Arabia, it is almost framed as evidence of ‘Islamisation’ or foreign influence. The post itselfgenerated hateful anti-Muslim sentiments and comments aimed towards Muslims, Albanians or anyone perceived to support the decision. Examples include referring to them as “wild, uncivilised tribe” or telling them to “go to Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, the Middle East.” Such comments target people based on their ethnicity, religion, or perceived cultural identity and contribute to a hostile online environment.

Many comments did not criticize the policy itself but instead generalised about entire communities, portraying them as uncivilised, incompatible with society, or as outsiders who do not belong in the country. Such rhetoric reinforces prejudice and social exclusion. Even where individual comments may not meet the legal threshold for criminal hate speech, a large volume of xenophobic and anti-Muslim comments can collectively create a hostile and intimidating environment for members of the targeted communities.