Monthly Monitoring Highlights – September 2026

During the month of September, the RDN monitoring team identified a range of hateful narratives and discourse including homophobia, sexism, the glorification of war criminals and intimidation towards journalists.

Homophobia in Kosovo

Screenwriter Arlinda Morina spoke openly on the show Canape (on T7 television) about the dilemmas she faced regarding her sexual orientation from a young age, the challenges she navigated before becoming certain of her queer identity, issues of social acceptance and rejection, and other topics concerning this community. A large number of citizens reacted to the broadcast by using hate speech, demonstrating that they would never accept the LGBTIQ+ community as equals; they characterised its members as mentally ill individuals whose goal is the destruction of humanity. Some commenters even directed various curses toward the community. Others criticised the media outlet for hosting Arlinda Morina, arguing that the LGBTIQ+ community and its individual members should not be “promoted,” as they believe such visibility is “harmful to young people and society.”

Homophobia has no place in society – as the broadcaster who invited Morina on their show, T7 television should monitor their comment section and reaction to their broadcast and defend the rights of Morina. They should take an active stand against homophobia and personal attacks aimed towards someone based on their sexual orientation.

Glorification of war criminals in Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina

Barski Portal published an article and video about the performance of the song “Đenerale, đenerale” (General, general) at a public event in Bar, during a concert by the ensemble “Fenečki biseri” marking the tenth anniversary of the consecration of the Cathedral of Saint John Vladimir. The article presented the performance in a strongly affirmative and emotional manner, describing it as a “particularly emotional moment” and emphasising that the audience stood up and sang along.

The song is associated with wartime nationalist symbolism connected to the Kosovo conflict and has also been used in recent public gatherings to glorify Ratko Mladić, a convicted war criminal by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Hague. Although the article does not explicitly target an ethnic group, its celebratory framing contributed to the normalisation of inflammatory wartime and nationalist narratives in a post-conflict context. 

Following the event, the Basic State Prosecutor’s Office in Bar opened a case ex officio and began gathering information to determine whether the performances contained elements of a criminal offence, including possible glorification of war crimes. Glorifying a convicted war criminal is under no means justifiable or acceptable and those who took part in doing so, should receive the adequate consequences.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, following Mladić’s death, several outlets in Republika Srpska, including BN, ATV and particularly RTRS, showed a consistent pattern of omitting or minimising the judicially established facts concerning Ratko Mladić’s crimes and final conviction. While BN did mention in one of its live updates that Mladić was serving a life sentence, it did not specify that the sentence was imposed for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Other reviewed reports by BN and ATV focused predominantly on his role as a military commander, the large number of people attending his funeral and the tributes paid to him.

The coverage by RTRS was particularly problematic. Its reports repeatedly presented Mladić primarily as a general and commander and highlighted the participation of supporters, former comrades and political officials. One report described a four-kilometre funeral procession and tens of thousands of people accompanying him, while another quoted his son describing him as someone who had “saved his people” and saying that the family would remain proud of him. RTRS also reported statements portraying Mladić as a figure who had defended his people and whose death had “united the Serbian people” for a second time. None of these reports provided the essential context that Mladić was finally convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

The glorification was also seen online with one Facebook page Српски Глас (Serbian voice) sharing an image of a crossed-out Bosnia and Herzegovina flag alongside a claim that the Sarajevo-based news portal Klix.ba was “upset” by the large number of people attending the funeral of convicted war criminal Ratko Mladić. In the accompanying text, the page described Klix.ba as a “Muslim portal”.  “When you enter Klix.ba, you will see how much hatred there is among former Serbs towards those who remain Serbs. It is not easy to be without the identity they created in 1993”, it is stated in the post.

Furthermore, a senior professional associate at Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Ministry for Human Rights and Refugees, Vedrana Krajišnik Ćosović, shared an AI-generated image resembling convicted war criminal Ratko Mladić on her personal Facebook profile following his death. The image was accompanied by the message: “What is earthly is temporary, while the heavenly kingdom is eternal.” The post prompted a procedure before the Ministry’s Ethics Commission.

Lastly, Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Minister of Foreign Trade and Economic Relations, Staša Košarac, visited Mladić’s grave in Belgrade and publicly paid tribute to him. Košarac laid a wreath and a badge bearing the flag of Republika Srpska and kissed the cross bearing Mladić’s name. Košarac published photographs of the visit on his official social media account, accompanied by the message: “I await the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.”

Glorification of war criminals is both immoral and completely unjustified. The Srebrenica genocide, orchestrated by Ratko Mladić saw the murdering of 8,000 Bosniak Muslim men which still bears scars on the families and loved ones till this day. Glorifying Mladić and paying tribute to him as a hero is extremely problematic and insensitive to all those who fell victims to his war crimes. 

Intimidation against journalists in Albania

On 24 September 2026, investigative journalist Klodiana Lala questioned former Director of the Albanian State Intelligence Service (SHISH), Vlora Hyseni, outside the Special Court against Corruption and Organised Crime (GJKKO), where Hyseni had appeared in connection with an ongoing investigation by the Special Prosecution against Corruption and Organised Crime (SPAK). According to the material reviewed, Lala had previously reported on the case and on alleged communications involving Hyseni and businessman Ergys Agasi.

While Lala was questioning Hyseni about these communications, Hyseni responded publicly by asking the journalist about alleged meetings with Serbian intelligence agents in hotel rooms at the Rogner Hotel. The statement was made in front of other journalists and television cameras, transforming what had begun as a question about an issue of public interest into a public allegation concerning the journalist herself.

The allegation immediately raised concerns among journalists and media-freedom organisations. SafeJournalists described the incident as a serious attempt to intimidate and discredit Lala while she was performing her professional duties. The organisation stressed that publicly associating an investigative journalist with a foreign intelligence service could damage her professional credibility and expose her to harassment, threats and security risks. Lala rejected Hyseni’s allegation and described the statement as an attempt to intimidate or blackmail her because of her reporting. She announced that she intended to file a criminal complaint with SPAK. She also stated that she would continue reporting on the investigation despite the accusation.

Likewise, on the same day, Citizens.al journalist Vjolanda Peca was escorted by police while reporting from a protest outside the Albanian Parliament. This was the second time within several months that Peca had been taken to a police station while carrying out her journalistic duties, following a similar incident on 23 July 2026.

Citizens.al stated that police also took Peca’s mobile phone and had not returned it after she left the police station. The newsroom additionally reported that some of her professional equipment, including her camera, had been damaged.

Media organisations strongly criticised the intervention. AGSH requested a public explanation from the State Police concerning the reasons and legal basis for Peca’s escort, stressing that preventing journalists from reporting at protests directly affects media freedom and the public’s right to information. UGSH similarly expressed concern and requested clarification from the Interior Ministry and State Police leadership, describing the escort and detention of a reporter while covering a protest as an interference with the journalist’s professional role.

Journalists should be able to carry out their profession and job in a secure and safe environment without the fear of intimidation or being escorted without justified cause. Journalists have a role and job to do when reporting on issues of public interest such as during a public protest. They need to be protected and allowed to carry out their work in peace. 

Sexism, discrimination and violence towards women politicians in North Macedoniaand Serbia

North Macedonia saw several cases of sexism aimed towards female politicians in the country. The first case involved Monika Zajkova, LDP leader, who attended a forum in Sofia and called on Bulgaria to support North Macedonia’s EU integration. Afterward, a Bulgarian foundation reportedly accused her on social media of having a romantic relationship with former PM Dimitar Kovachevski. The allegations were described by Macedonian media as a personal attack aimed at discrediting her. A politicians relationship status is not relevant to their political work and is only used to undermine someone’s position. 

In another case, following Stefanija Kuzmanovska’s announcement as the new SDMM president, many comments focused on her appearance and body size, with users calling her “fat” and mocking her rather than discussing her political role or qualifications. This resulted in body-shaming and derogatory comments directed at a young woman in politics.

In a further case, Petar Bogoevski directed a vulgar, sexually explicit insult at EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos on social media, addressing her as “Kos (UDBA)” and then using an obscene sexual phrase.

Targeting female politicians through sexist and misogynistic comments in an aim to discredit their work and undermine their position in politics is extremely problematic. The personal romantic relationship and the physical appearance of an individual is of no relevance to their profession in the political sphere. 

In Serbia, similar patterns of sexism, and even violence, were observed.

In the first case, the Mayor of Kraljevo, Predrag Terzić, posted on his official Facebook account a video created with the help of artificial intelligence, targeting Jovana Jemović from Raška, a candidate on the Student List. The video focuses on her sexuality and constitutes sexual shaming, or “slut-shaming,” a well-known method of discrediting women. The attack on Jovana came after her speech at the reception for student cyclists who arrived in Kraljevo on Sunday evening as part of the “Guardians of the Constitution” campaign. The very next day, the Mayor of Kraljevo, Predrag Terzić, posted a video containing insults directed at Jovana and making claims about her private life. Jemović said that the allegations made in the edited video are untrue. She said she expected low blows but did not think that her four-year-old child would also be targeted during the campaign. In addition to Terzić, the video was also posted by the President of the Municipality of Vrnjačka Banja, Boban Đorđević. 

The publication of an AI-generated video that sexualises and humiliates Student List candidate Jovana Jemović represents another example of the exploitation of women in political campaigning.

In the second case, Belgrade Mayor Aleksandar Šapić attacked Tatjana Mićić, a councillor from the Kreni-Promeni movement. Following a verbal altercation, Šapić broke Mićić’s nose and upper jaw. Šapić claimed that he did not hit her but rather pushed her away during a physical confrontation with her husband, precisely in order not to hurt the “weaker sex.”

In response, RTS reported that Šapić “was involved in a physical altercation” with a councillor from the Kreni-Promeni movement. While Mićić was explicitly identified as a political opponent, Šapić’s official position was omitted, thereby presenting him as an individual and distancing him from the ruling establishment. The act of Šapić’s alleged attack was also presented in passive terms by describing it as a “physical altercation,” rather than clearly stating that the mayor struck a female citizen. B92 reported Šapić’s remarks from a press conference held on September 29, where he claimed that the incident was clearly politically motivated and that he had not attacked anyone but had defended himself, and that he would always defend himself.

Pro-government media outlets have reported the incident in a similar manner: Šapić was defending himself, while Mićić “accused” him of attacking her; Šapić was the one who was verbally attacked and subsequently physically confronted; Šapić pushed a “woman” in order to defend himself from her husband; and he was merely involved in an incident in which he was attacked. The focus was totally placed on Šapić as the victim, both of the alleged attack and of Mićić’s accusations which is both untrue and unfair in relation to the actual victim, Mićić. 

On the other hand, former president Aleksandar Vučić placed responsibility on Šapić, arguing that he should have walked away because he holds public office and, as such, bears responsibility. The main message of the press conference held to address this incident was precisely that – Šapić was taking responsibility and not because he had attacked citizens, but because he had failed to walk away once the verbal altercation began. This is also why he apologised to his “friends” in the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), as well as directly to Vučić. As for the “accusations,” Šapić said he would sue Mićić and her husband, as well as Kreni-Promeni, over what he described as lies about him. There was also a tense exchange with an N1 journalist, whom Šapić accused of spreading false claims that he had been under the influence of psychoactive substances.

The Student list pointed out that violence against women cannot be invoked as a slogan only when it serves a particular political campaign. Likewise, violence towards women is never justified and especially not to be used for political gain. Šapić should be held responsible for his actions by firstly and foremostly, admitting his role and taking accountability, and apologising and facing the consequences for his actions.