NGO and its founder ordered to pay damages to army chief

In most western courts, except the US, you need proof when you make a claim of war crime.
In this instance, the claim was a war crime committed by Dikovic in Kosovo. It is such a serious accusation you do need to have proof of substance not just hear say or rumour or accepting lower standard of proof. This is not a traffic violation, but a war crime.
Dikovic was well in his right to take defamation action against Kandic and the court had every right to hear it. The onus of proof lies with Kandic. She made the claim and she has to supply the evidence, but she did not have it. All Kandic has is a big mouth.

Finally these NGOs are no longer allowed to blatantly lie with impunity. But don't feel sad for Kandic, she makes a lot more in a month than what her fines amount to. Since 2000, these people have been paid 6-8 times the average salary in Serbia and up until 2012 they were financed not just from Western institutions but from the Serbian government as well. How sickening, Serbian tax payers would fund the likes of Kandic to make excuses for crimes committed against Serbian civilians during the war and making up lies to incriminate anyone who fought on the Serbian side.

Since 2012, the new government has pulled back these funds so like wolves they went on the offensive. But this time they will have to pay for their lies.

Did she think she was protected by parliamentary immunity.

Don't worry, that's one lunch for George.

All independent free thinking countries should ban NGOs.most are financed by America to promote their agenda and to spread choas, they are not there to help countries but to destroy them. Russia has the right idea when it clamped down on these paid provacatuers. the orange revolution, the rose revolution, the Arab spring etc etc all financed by outsiders under the disguise of 'democracy, freedom, human rights' etc to destroy democracy freedom and human rights aided by traitors.

That's why Serbia is doomed country. One of few voices of reason and truth and this law and order inserbistan its NOT path for Europe integration

The appeal will cost more than the penalty.

Still, it's right to appeal.

This article seems to show that the court is acting outside of its proper jurisdiction. If there are accusations of criminality, they need to be dealt with by investigating authorities and by the criminal courts before suing becomes an option. If the accusations are not taken to a criminal court (maybe for lack of evidence or because of corruption in the process) then the matter should stand as unresolved but the onus is then on any accuser to indicate that there are some grounds for the accusation - a lower standard of proof needs to be applied. I don't see that a civil court can refuse to hear that level of evidence.

(sj, 12 April 2016 14:11)

Did you actually read the article?

I read the article to and I do not understand this:

"On the one hand, the court held that the burden of proof for the claims about General Dikovic's involvement in war crimes was on the defendants - the FHP and Natasa Kandic, and on the other, it refused to hear witnesses proposed by the defendants, on the grounds that the resolution of this issue was under the jurisdiction of the court for war crimes."

It mean that is not over - because this is in the "jurisdiction" of the court for war crimes. What is worrying is that Serbian government has censored the war crimes files.

Did you actually read the article?
(Reader, 12 April 2016 15:16)


Actually I read about this matter on another site which was in far more detail. Sadly B92 tends to truncate a story to fit its word limit and at times gives a completely different impression of a story.
Kandic has no evidence despite having so called witnesses. If she did I’m she little Natasha would not have hesitated in asking the Hague to intervene.

And so, one by one, the opposing voices are intimidated and discredited, until the only voice left is the Great Leader His Majesty Aleksandar Vucic, and his merry band of followers...

All independent free thinking countries should ban NGOs.
(Diana, 12 April 2016 19:34)

In independent free thinking countries, NGOs which promote BS are ignored, there is no need to ban them, they don't have an impact anyway.

For an analogy, there is no need to ban something like rt news in a free thinking country because few people, if any, would pay attention to BS of the type that rt news spreads.

But if an NGO promotes stuff that is not BS, then yes, that becomes a problem because it starts to make people think that they are not sheep but citizens with rights, and that is a problem for rulers who want to rule over sheep!

That's why Serbia is doomed country. One of few voices of reason and truth and this law and order inserbistan its NOT path for Europe integration

The appeal will cost more than the penalty.

Still, it's right to appeal.

This article seems to show that the court is acting outside of its proper jurisdiction. If there are accusations of criminality, they need to be dealt with by investigating authorities and by the criminal courts before suing becomes an option. If the accusations are not taken to a criminal court (maybe for lack of evidence or because of corruption in the process) then the matter should stand as unresolved but the onus is then on any accuser to indicate that there are some grounds for the accusation - a lower standard of proof needs to be applied. I don't see that a civil court can refuse to hear that level of evidence.

(sj, 12 April 2016 14:11)

Did you actually read the article?

Finally these NGOs are no longer allowed to blatantly lie with impunity. But don't feel sad for Kandic, she makes a lot more in a month than what her fines amount to. Since 2000, these people have been paid 6-8 times the average salary in Serbia and up until 2012 they were financed not just from Western institutions but from the Serbian government as well. How sickening, Serbian tax payers would fund the likes of Kandic to make excuses for crimes committed against Serbian civilians during the war and making up lies to incriminate anyone who fought on the Serbian side.

Since 2012, the new government has pulled back these funds so like wolves they went on the offensive. But this time they will have to pay for their lies.

In most western courts, except the US, you need proof when you make a claim of war crime.
In this instance, the claim was a war crime committed by Dikovic in Kosovo. It is such a serious accusation you do need to have proof of substance not just hear say or rumour or accepting lower standard of proof. This is not a traffic violation, but a war crime.
Dikovic was well in his right to take defamation action against Kandic and the court had every right to hear it. The onus of proof lies with Kandic. She made the claim and she has to supply the evidence, but she did not have it. All Kandic has is a big mouth.

Did she think she was protected by parliamentary immunity.

All independent free thinking countries should ban NGOs.
(Diana, 12 April 2016 19:34)

In independent free thinking countries, NGOs which promote BS are ignored, there is no need to ban them, they don't have an impact anyway.

For an analogy, there is no need to ban something like rt news in a free thinking country because few people, if any, would pay attention to BS of the type that rt news spreads.

But if an NGO promotes stuff that is not BS, then yes, that becomes a problem because it starts to make people think that they are not sheep but citizens with rights, and that is a problem for rulers who want to rule over sheep!

All independent free thinking countries should ban NGOs.most are financed by America to promote their agenda and to spread choas, they are not there to help countries but to destroy them. Russia has the right idea when it clamped down on these paid provacatuers. the orange revolution, the rose revolution, the Arab spring etc etc all financed by outsiders under the disguise of 'democracy, freedom, human rights' etc to destroy democracy freedom and human rights aided by traitors.

Did you actually read the article?
(Reader, 12 April 2016 15:16)


Actually I read about this matter on another site which was in far more detail. Sadly B92 tends to truncate a story to fit its word limit and at times gives a completely different impression of a story.
Kandic has no evidence despite having so called witnesses. If she did I’m she little Natasha would not have hesitated in asking the Hague to intervene.

And so, one by one, the opposing voices are intimidated and discredited, until the only voice left is the Great Leader His Majesty Aleksandar Vucic, and his merry band of followers...

Don't worry, that's one lunch for George.

I read the article to and I do not understand this:

"On the one hand, the court held that the burden of proof for the claims about General Dikovic's involvement in war crimes was on the defendants - the FHP and Natasa Kandic, and on the other, it refused to hear witnesses proposed by the defendants, on the grounds that the resolution of this issue was under the jurisdiction of the court for war crimes."

It mean that is not over - because this is in the "jurisdiction" of the court for war crimes. What is worrying is that Serbian government has censored the war crimes files.