April 11, 2021 - The 10 winners of the innovative Dubrovnik Digital Nomad-in-Residence (DNiR) competition have been announced. Meet them one by one. Next up, Albert Cañigueral from Barcelona.

The DNiR programme, which has been designed by Saltwater Nomads, in partnership with Total Croatia News, the CIty of Dubrovnik and the Dubrovnik Tourist Board (and financed by the latter two), is an innovative direction for the Pearl of the Adriatic, as it looks to diversify its tourism strategy away from overtourism and in the wake of the pandemic. 

Albert Cañigueral is a Barcelona-based member of the Ouishare network. He is an explorer of the future of work, workforces and workplaces. Well-seasoned traveller looking forward to this very special digital nomad experience.

1. You are a DN-i-R winner. Congratulations! How do you feel?

I feel extremely fortunate and thankful for having been selected for DN-i-R  I am also very excited to be on the road again and to revisit Dubrovnik nearly 20 years after my first visit in 2003. 

2. How did you hear about the competition, and why did you decide to apply?

As part of my ongoing research for a web-documentary about the future of work and the future of cities I set a number of google news filters about digital nomads. When I got the article about the DN-i-R proposal on TCN, I saw it as the best opportunity to learn firsthand about digital nomads by a) becoming one myself b) meeting well-seasoned nomads and c) helping to design a strategy for the city. I submitted my entry 12h before the deadline.

3. Which particular skills and ideas will you be bringing to the party?

People say that my superpower is connecting people, ideas and projects. Through these connections I happen to know a lot of examples and ongoing projects around the world. I hope I will be able to apply this knowledge and connections to DN-i-R. I will also bridge to the Spanish-speaking part of the world.

4. What are you most looking forward to about DNIR?

Looking forward to the diverse people gathered around DNIR (participants, organizers, sponsors, etc.), and their stories. I am also looking forward to random encounters and events. As my friends from IAM Internet claim "in randomness we trust". Finally I am looking forward to helping craft a city policy regarding digital nomads while enjoying the Croatian culture.

5. Let's get you involved in the Dubrovnik community. Who or what would you like to connect with?

I would love to connect with people to learn and experience more about water sports such as kitesurfing, paddle, sailing, etc. It's something pending on my todo list for way too long! Being surrounded by what should help, isn't it? 

Here is Albert's application video:

You can learn more about the program here. 

Saltwater Nomads' Tanja Polegubic on Dubrovnik Digital Nomad-in-Residence Programme

Dubrovnik Mayor Mato Frankovic on Digital Nomads, US Flights, 2021 Season

For the latest digital nomad news from Croatia, follow the dedicated TCN section.

The winner announcement video:

April 11, 2021 - The Croatian National Tourist Board has sued Total Croatia News CEO Paul Bradbury twice, seeking a total of 100,000 kuna in damages. The full lawsuit and reply by Bradbury's lawyer, Vanja Juric. 

Lawsuit:

Date 12.06.2020. An article entitled "Fiasco: We’re boasting that we’re a coronavirus free zone, and foreign tourists have no idea about it" was published on the INDEX.HR web portal, in which the defendant presented incorrect and untrue information that violated the rights and interests of the plaintiff.

In the article in question, in relation to the plaintiff, the defendant maliciously and perfidiously presents inaccurate and untrue allegations, all with the evident aim of manipulating the Croatian public space in order to create and then unfoundedly maintain a negative perception.

These are the following untrue and defamatory allegations of the defendant:

"One of the tasks of the CNTB should be to follow the European media and then correct misinformation, because in addition to the Irish, misinformation was also published in the Belgian media that their citizens cannot enter Croatia."

"So, Croatia is promoted only on the German, Austrian, Hungarian, Czech, Slovak, Polish and Slovenian markets. Why didn't they target the Swiss market and that of neighbouring countries as well? I don't know why they aren’t targeting the Swiss, who are well-to-do guests and we are a car destination for them, or why the campaign isn’t being carried out in neighbouring countries such as Serbia and BiH, especially now that we will not get Americans. So, while Croatia is advertised in only 7 countries, Greece is sending a message to all foreign media that absolutely all tourists are welcome here.’’

2. The essence of the previously cited allegations of the defendant is reduced to presenting untruths and slander about the activities of the plaintiff in connection with the preparation of the tourist season in conditions determined by the consequences of the crisis caused by the COVID-19 virus. On top of that, the defendant offers an exclusively one-sided presentation of the situation without having previously officially checked any of the above with the plaintiff itself as the umbrella national tourist organisation in the Republic of Croatia.

Therefore, contrary to all the allegations of the defendant from this article, the plaintiff, in extremely unfavourable conditions, defined by the coronavirus crisis took all of the necessary measures to achieve the prerequisites for achieving the best possible tourist results in the summer and autumn months of 2020. Of course, and contrary to the defendant's untrue allegations, the plaintiff's activity is absolutely dedicated to presenting the Republic of Croatia as a tourist destination that is a safe destination in the pandemic situation around the world. In that sense, and contrary to Luženik's allegations from the article in question, the plaintiff intensively promotes the Republic of Croatia on a global scale as a safe tourist destination, and such activity is not focused only on a number of European countries, as incorrectly stated by the defendant in the article. Namely, the plaintiff spends all the time on marketing campaigns and promotional announcements in 14 markets, not just 7 and this is incorrectly stated by the defendant in the article in question.

It is obvious that the defendant interprets the obligation to respect epidemiological measures by all social and economic entities in the Republic of Croatia, including the plaintiff, perfidiously, maliciously, but also extremely unprofessionally, since the defendant himself presents himself to the public as a tourism expert. The defendant interprets it as poor and unprofessional treatment in connection with the organisation of activities related to the preparation of this year's tourist season.

In doing so, the defendant, obviously maliciously, neglects the fact that from the beginning of the pandemic, the plaintiff continuously and promptly informs the general public about the conditions of travel and stay in the Republic of Croatia, all in accordance with the applicable rules and recommendations of the National Staff, as well as through direct communication with its network of representative offices.

Finally, in accordance with the valid strategic documents, the plaintiff continuously monitors the media in key broadcasting markets, and communication with the same media takes place "ad hoc" whenever the plaintiff receives certain notifications about erroneous publications and needs for corrections, so the defendant's allegations are incorrect and utterly untrue.

Following the above, it is obvious that the defendant, by publishing the previously cited untrue and defamatory allegations, grossly and severely violated the plaintiff's character in terms of Article 19 of the Civil Obligations Act, which is reflected in the violation of reputation (something along the lines of slander/defamation).

Precisely for this reason, and due to the violation (slander or defamation), the plaintiff in this civil proceeding demands from the defendant adequate monetary satisfaction in the amount of 50,000.00 KN.

EVIDENCE: - as before;

The main reason why the plaintiff is raising this lawsuit and claim is the protection of its rights and interests due to untrue and incomplete reporting to the Croatian public by the defendant, which then ultimately imposes the need to correct previously emphasised information that is incorrectly published and misinterpreted in this article by the defendant.

The plaintiff points out that in the case of a public apology made by the defendant, done so in a manner that fully corresponds to the manner of publishing the disputed statements, i.e. in the same or equivalent place, it is ready to accept without the further continuation of this litigation.

I. The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff the amount of HRK 50,000.00 together with the corresponding statutory default interest rate from 04.08.2020 as the date of filing the lawsuit until payment at the rate of the average interest rate on loans granted for a period longer than one year to non-financial companies calculated for the reference period preceding the current half-year, increased by three percentage points, within 15 days under threat of enforcement.

II. The defendant is ordered to reimburse the plaintiff for the incurred litigation costs together with the corresponding statutory default interest running from the date of the first instance judgment until payment at the rate of the average interest rate on loans granted for more than one year to nonfinancial companies calculated for the previous reference period, increased by three percentage points, within 15 days under threat of enforcement.

Reply by Bradbury's lawyer, Vanja Juric:

I. The Defendant authorised the lawyer Vanja Jurić from Zagreb, (Ulica grada Mainza 13) to represent him in this case, so the proposal is to deliver all documents [related to this case] to the address of the law office.

II. The defendant disputes the merits of the lawsuit entirely, as well as the [monetary] amount of the lawsuit, for the following reasons:

1. The defendant did not submit a request for the correction of the information to the publisher of the portal www.index.hr.

1.1. The defendant considers it undisputed that the information that is the subject of this lawsuit was published in the media - on the portal www.index.hr. Although the lawsuit was filed against the declarant - the defendant, and not against the publisher who published the disputed article/interview, the plaintiff, before filing a lawsuit in this case, should have sent a request to the publisher of the portal www.index.hr for a correction of that information.

1.2. The Law on Media stipulates that a person who has previously addressed the publisher with a request for the correction of information or a request for an apology, when a correction is not possible, has the right to file a lawsuit for non-pecuniary damage. Likewise, the same Law establishes a request for the correction of information as the primary way of compensating for any damage caused by publishing information in the media, while a lawsuit for non-pecuniary damage is only an ancillary means for violations that are particularly severe and cannot be "corrected" by the publication of any corrections or apologies.

1.3. In accordance with the identical principles established by the Law on Media, and the Law on Obligations, Art. 1099 and 1100 determine the ways of repairing non-pecuniary damage. The Law (abbreviated Croatian: ZOO) determines that non-pecuniary damage is primarily repaired "by the publishing of a judgment or correction, by withdrawing the statement by which the violation was committed or by some other means that can achieve the purpose achieved by fair monetary compensation." The payment of fair monetary compensation is also prescribed by this Law only as a secondary way of repairing non-material damage, and only when "the severity of the injury and the circumstances of the case justify it".

1.5. Because the plaintiff did not make the slightest effort to correct the allegedly inaccurate information or for the defendant or Index as the publisher to compensate them for the alleged damage in any of the ways provided by the Law as a primary means, the plaintiff was not authorised to file this claim for non-pecuniary damage. The plaintiff, by not filing a request for the correction of the information or the withdrawal of the statement, showed that no actual damage was caused to them.

2. Context

2.1. The disputed statements of the defendants were made in the midst of the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic, at the beginning of June, when the tourist season would already be underway in Croatia under normal circumstances. From March to June 2020 (and later), precisely because of the pandemic, Croatia experienced a steep decline in tourist arrivals and overnight stays, like most other countries, which posed a major problem for tourism workers, hoteliers, small renters, and ultimately for the budget of the Republic of Croatia, which has suffered and continues to suffer great losses.

2.2. The defendant is the author and publisher of the portal www.total-croatia-news.com, on which he publishes various [types of] content, with special emphasis placed on topics relating to tourism. The defendant is being treated in Croatia as one of the tourism experts, which is why, in this particular case, he was contacted by a journalist from the www.index.hr portal. In the aforementioned period, namely, all Croatian media reported on the situation regarding tourism, the activities of the Ministry of Tourism and the Croatian Tourist Board, all with the aim of initiating a public debate on these issues, and finding solutions to problems encountered by Croatian tourism.

2.3. During the same period, a number of inaccurate and chaotic pieces of information about the conditions of arrival in Croatia, the conditions for crossing the country's borders and other important circumstances that tourists should have known were spread in Croatia, as well as in the countries from which tourists come. This was, after all, commented on by numerous tourism and communication experts.

EVIDENCE:

- Article "Minister of Tourism revealed three scenarios for this year's season: It is possible to drop overnight stays by 90 percent", Glas Istre, April 2, 2020.
- Article "Disaster on the horizon: Steep decline in tourist overnight stays - 94.8 percent fewer tourists came in May than last year", www.net.hr, from 10.06.2020.
- Article "Croatian tourism is on its knees: The situation is uncertain, and the announcements do not promise yet: We are opening a hotel, but we have no reservations", www.net.hr, from 01.06.2020.
- Article “We're being stripped naked to the end! A country of missed opportunities with 314 tourist boards ", from April 10, 2020.

2.4. In addition to the above, on March 30, 2020, the plaintiff himself announced in his newsletter that "all marketing and PR activities in the [emitting/foreign] markets have been postponed."

EVIDENCE:

- A printout of the plaintiff's newsletter, dated 31 March 2020.

3. The disputed information is factually substantiated

3.1. The controversial article deals with the problematisation of the actions of the Ministry of Tourism and the Croatian Tourist Board, in the circumstances of the pandemic and the difficult challenges in which tourism found itself. The article, as well as the statements of the defendants (and other interlocutors) talks about the decline in the number of overnight stays and tourist arrivals, presents statistics to the public and compares the campaigns of other competing countries, in relation to Croatia's promotion in foreign markets and its shortcomings.

3.2. Although not covered by the lawsuit, the defendant in a statement for the portal www.index.hr, very clearly explained the basis of his objections, in relation to the actions of the competent ministry and the prosecutor, stating that Croatia announced it would ''open its borders for 10 countries, this is an automatic message to everyone else that they are not welcome ", as the Irish Times wrote about the fact that their citizens could not come to Croatia, which is not true, but the Croatian Government created this confusion", that same Irish Times [publication], after his intervention, changed that article, etc. Ultimately, the defendant presents his [value] judgments about the duties of the plaintiff and the Ministry of Tourism and expresses an opinion on what was wrong in their conduct and what should be improved.

3.3. The lawsuit includes two disputable - allegedly defamatory - pieces of information, although it is completely unclear from the lawsuit what the inaccuracy or defamatory nature of the defendant's statements consists of. The defendant considers that the plaintiff does not distinguish between the concepts of value judgments and factual claims and that they do not understand the meaning of the concept of defamation.

3.4. The first piece of information from the defendant states that one of the CNTB's tasks is to follow the European media and correct misinformation, since the Irish and Belgian media published information that their citizens could not come to Croatia, which was not true.

3.4.1. It is completely unclear to the defendant which part of the quoted information the plaintiff disputes. Does the plaintiff dispute the conclusion that the CNTB's job is to follow the European media? Or that misinformation was published in the Irish and Belgian media? In both cases, since this is factually substantiated information, there can be no question of defamation or any other type of damage to the plaintiff's reputation.

3.5. The second piece of information from the defendant refers to the enumeration of the markets in which Croatia, in the disputed period, advertised. After that, the defendant expressed the opinion that the prosecutor and the ministry should have "targeted" other countries, such as Switzerland, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which are our neighbours and, due to their proximity, the most likely guests. At the end of that statement, the defendant draws a parallel with the campaign and communication of Greece, which is, in terms of tourism, our competitor country.

3.5.1. Here, too, it is unclear what the plaintiff considers defamation, since the plaintiff themselves issued a press release on June 1, 2020, stating that they were “conducting a large promotional campaign in seven European markets, in Slovenia, Austria, Germany, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland.''

EVIDENCE:

- The statement of the plaintiff dated 01.06.2020.

3.5.2. As for the second part of the disputed statement - does the plaintiff challenge the right of the defendant to bring a court to/on where Croatia should still advertise? Is it problematic to mention Switzerland as a country from which guests come to Croatia? It is also unclear which part of the defendant's opinion is disputable, stating that the campaign must be aimed at both Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and why the mention of Greece as an example of good communication with tourists is disputable. The defendant, even with the best of intentions, does not understand why any of the cited allegations are being deemed to be incorrect, and especially defamatory.

EVIDENCE:

- An insight into the submitted documentation
- Hearing the defendant
- The examination of witness Krešimir Macan
- The examination of witness Zoran Pejović

3.6. All statements of the defendant that are disputable in this procedure were confirmed by another interlocutor of the Index portal, also an expert on tourism issues - Mr. Zoran Pejović. He stated that Croatia "does not work nearly enough on the promotion, in fact it does nothing", that it seems to him that the promotion is done "only for internal needs" and that he came to such insights "through contacts with travel agencies from the EU / ... / they hear very little about Croatia or hear nothing compared to [what they hear about] Portugal and Greece, which have strong campaigns. The promotion of Croatia in the world is going very, very poorly and that must be done much more strongly. "

EVIDENCE:

- An insight into the disputed article

4. The disputed information is not objectively suitable for the causing of damage

In accordance with the Law and the positions of the Croatian courts, in order for the court to award the plaintiff monetary (or other sort of) compensation, the information that is the subject of the dispute must be objectively suitable to cause damage. For all the reasons stated in the previous points of this statement, especially considering that these are factually based value judgments about the public action(s) taken by public authorities, the information that the plaintiff marked as disputable is not objectively suitable to cause damage, and especially not damage that would justify the verdict of fair monetary compensation.

5. Public interest

5.1. Tourism is one of the economic branches from which a significant number of Croatian citizens live. In addition, Croatia's revenues from tourism reach as much as 25% of GDP, so there can be no doubt that the success of tourism and tourism as such is a matter of significant public interest.

5.2. Also, the plaintiff is a public authority, whose activities are financed with taxpayers' money and which is responsible for the affairs and functioning of the tourist activities in Croatia. Therefore, any member of the public or the media has the right and duty to comment, criticise and problematise their public actions and all circumstances related to the performance of tasks delegated to them.

6. Assumptions of liability for damage

6.1. In proceedings of this type, the plaintiff is obliged to prove the cumulative existence of all presumptions of liability for damages, namely: the harm-doer, the harmful action, the damage, the link between the above and the illegality of the defendant in the proceedings.

The plaintiff did not, nor will he be able to prove these assumptions, since:

- The information in question is not objectively capable of causing damage to the plaintiff;
- The defendant is not a harm-doer, but the harm-doer, if there is one at all, is the portal that requested and published the plaintiff's statements;
- Actions - the statements of the defendant do not represent a harmful/damage-causing action, given that it is information that is factually based and/or represents the value judgments of the defendant on a topic of public interest;
- The damage did not occur, which is especially evident from the fact that the plaintiff did not do anything in relation to the statements of the defendant to request a denial by which the disputed information would be publicly refused and citizens would be properly informed;
- There is no link between the harmful action (which it is not) and the alleged damage, given that in the disputed, period many media [publications/portals] and members of the Croatian public publicly discussed the problems regarding tourism and the insufficient activities of the prosecutors;
- The defendant's conduct is not unlawful.

6.2. Given that the facts of this case are quite clear, the defendant at this stage will not go into more detail to clarify each of these items and refer to specific decisions of Croatian courts and the European Court of Human Rights, relating to freedom of expression and responsibility for opinion. However, the defendant draws the court's attention to the plaintiff's allegations that the defendant acted unlawfully, as such a possible finding of the court would be contrary to all existing standards of freedom of expression, especially when such expression relates to the work and activities of the public authorities. Making established judgments about the work of public authorities is not and cannot be illegal.

7. An attempt to retaliate against the defendant

7.1. The defendant considers that this lawsuit was not filed for damages that the plaintiff claims was caused to them, but for an attempt to retaliate against the defendant who continuously, due to the nature of his work, problematises the work of the Ministry of Tourism and the plaintiff.

7.2. The defendant finds it indicative that the plaintiff:

- Did not file a request for correction of the information, the removal of the disputed article or the withdrawal of the plaintiff's statement, to which they were legally entitled;
- Did not file a lawsuit against the portal www.index.hr, although it was that portal that published statements that the plaintiff considers harmful;
- Did not file a lawsuit against another interlocutor of the Index portal, whose statements were also published in the disputed article, nor against other media and/or experts who publicly criticised the actions of the plaintiff.

7.3. The plaintiff, although they had a number of legal remedies at their disposal, did not take any measures/steps to correct/repair the alleged damage, but instead filed a lawsuit directly and personally against the defendant, for damages in the amount of as much as HRK 50,000.00. For this reason, the defendant considers that this proceeding was not initiated in order [for the plaintiff] to protect their reputation - given that the information itself was not objectively suitable to harm the plaintiff - but to compel the defendant, by bringing his existential and financial stability into question, to stop speaking publicly about the plaintiff. Given the provisions of the Civil Obligations Act, the defendant considers that the claim for fair monetary compensation in this case is incompatible with the legal purpose of awarding such compensation and that the claim, on this basis, should be rejected.

* * * * *

Following the above, it is proposed to the titled/stated court to reject the plaintiff's claim in its entirety, and to oblige the plaintiff to reimburse the defendant for the litigation costs caused.

The Index article in question is still online - you can read it here.

April 11, 2021- The severe earthquake that struck Sisak-Moslavina County on 29 December 2020 destroyed the building housing the Petrinja Municipal Library and Reading Room. Still, it has now reopened a housing container, making it possible for residents to enjoy books again.

"We think we have succeeded because, as I said in our requests for help, a city without books is not a city," the director of the City Library, Ante Mrgan, said earlier this week on the occasion of opening the first container library in Croatia.

Several days after the devastating earthquake, Mrgan and his colleagues started rescuing the books and equipment. They would enter the library's storage space wearing protective helmets and sort the library stock, with each new tremor posing an even greater danger.

"At that time, when I entered the library building, it hadn't yet been classified as 'red.' The earthquakes were happening all the time, and it was impossible to know when stronger ones would occur," the director recalled.

After a quick inspection, the building was declared unusable, and each new tremor caused more damage. The last one occurred a few days ago, and new consequences can already be seen. There is no concrete information about the damage because the Petrinja Open University manages the building. However, the documentation preparation is underway, and we will see what the profession will say, Mrgan said.

The building is located on sandy and soft ground. During the construction in the 1940s, pillars of an old Turkish fortress were found. The basement is very humid, and the building had cracked in some parts even before the earthquake due to heavy traffic, requiring repairs even then, the director noted.

He added that he would like the building to be torn down and a new and safer one built for all the cultural needs of the people of Petrinja.

Today, the library and its stock are housed in 11 containers, and there is a playroom for children in one of them.

For more news about Croatia, follow TCN's dedicated page. 

April 11, 2021 - The brilliant Sinkovic brothers win European gold at the Rowing Championships in Varese, Italy!

Brother Martin and Valent Sinkovic won the gold medal in coxless pairs at the European Rowing Championships in Varese!

The Sinkovic brothers led throughout the race and deservedly celebrated in the end, passing through the finish line with a time of 6:23.37. Second place was taken by the Italian crew, and in third was the team from Serbia. Earlier in the day, sisters Ivana and Josipa Jurković took fifth place in the women's competition of the same discipline.

Damir Martin will fight in the singles final at 3:06 pm. 

You might recall that the Sinkovic brothers won silver at the European Championship held last year, which was the only rowing competition held in the pandemic year. 

Until this European Championship, the Sinkovic brothers have won 11 European, world, and Olympic gold medals, four silver medals, and one bronze medal as members of the foursome, double sculls, and coxless pairs. They moved to the coxless pairs discipline after the Olympic Games in Rio.

"A phenomenal race and it is wonderful to be the European champion again after last year when the Romanians surprised us. It is the Olympic year and we can hardly wait for new races, especially the historic one, the first World Championships in Zagreb," said Valent Sinković.

"We had a great feeling for the past three or four weeks and this was a really good race. However, the season has just begun, and we know what our goal is - Olympic gold in Tokyo," said Martin Sinković.

In the first major competition in the new discipline, they won silver at the 2017 World Championships and then won gold at the European Championships and World Champs in 2018 and 2019, before surprisingly finishing second behind Romanian team Cozmius and Tudose.

The next competition and another stop on the way to the Olympics in Tokyo is the World Rowing Championship, which is being held for the first time in history at Zagreb's Jarun from April 30 to May 2. 

We will have more after Damir Martin's final race at 3 pm! Stay tuned! 

Source: HRT

To follow the latest sports news in Croatia, follow TCN's dedicated page.

To learn more about sport in Croatia, CLICK HERE. 

April 11, 2021 - Four students from Split have designed a device for cleaning microplastics from the sea, which unlike other such devices is remote-controlled and can move around.

Antonija Buzov, Petra Kundid, Matej Radić and Andro Rudan have designed a system that can filter seawater and remove microplastics from it, and can be guided by remote control, which makes it better than other similar purifiers.

"The problem with microplastics is that it adsorbs heavy metals, so when you swallow microplastic particles from the sea, you are actually ingesting heavy metals, which could eventually lead to various cancers, bleeding and other diseases," said Petra Kundid, who is working on a doctorate in parasitology.

As microplastics are found on the surface and the very bottom of the sea, they originally envisioned a roller with holes, with the properties of a sponge, but as they did further research, they designed a semi-submerged box that filters and cleans the sea water that passes through it. They called the product "CBRO".

"We used cheap materials because this kind of product normally requires a lot of money, which is, I believe, why individuals do not dare to 'tackle' this problem," Andro Rudan while explaining their prototype.

"The propeller was printed on a 3D printer, the engine is from a drill and is powered by three batteries from laptops that are no longer used. The electronics and the device are connected to the Internet. We control the rudder and the engine speed via mobile phone," he said, adding that they intend to install sensors which would measure the amount of water that passes through the device in order to obtain numerical data which would later be easier to use in studies.

Plastic makes up 85% of waste on beaches around the world, and last year the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) said that over 200,000 tonnes of plastic leaks into the Mediterranean every year, with a sharp warning that by 2040 the amount will double unless significant measures are taken.

At a plenary session in late March, the European Parliament, in its resolution on marine litter, underscored the damage it caused to fisheries and called for urgent measures to reduce such waste, from further restricting the use of disposable plastics to promoting collection and recycling. The resolution also called for a stronger inclusion of the maritime aspect into the European Green Deal.

For more, follow Made in Croatia.

April 11, 2021 - Over the past 24 hours, 1,617 new cases of the coronavirus infection have been confirmed in Croatia, and there have been 39 related deaths, the national COVID-19 crisis management team said on Sunday.

The number of active cases in Croatia stands at 13,241, a decrease of 425 from Saturday.

There are 1,870 COVID patients in hospitals, 182 of whom are on ventilators.

There are currently 28,645 people in self-isolation.

Since 25 February 2020, when Croatia registered its first case of the infection, 292,516 people have contracted the novel coronavirus, 6,308 of them have died, and 272,967 have recovered, including 2,003 in the last 24 hours.

To date, 1,639,110 people have been tested, 9,307 of whom over the past 24 hours.

As of 10 April, 583,931 doses of vaccine have been used, and 473,522 people have been vaccinated. Of them, 361,385 people have received the first dose, and 110,409 have received both doses. For 1,728 people, there is no data on which dose they have received.

For more about Covid-19 in Croatia, follow TCN's dedicated page.

April 11, 2021 - In the RTL.hr Open Editorial, public figures write freely and openly about developments in their field of expertise. A look at SLAPP lawsuits Croatia.

In March, lawyer Vanja Jurić was appointed to the Expert Group of the European Commission for the so-called SLAPP lawsuits, as previously reported on TCN. These are "strategic" lawsuits that are unfounded or exaggerated and are aimed at intimidating and silencing those who ask questions of public interest - journalists, activists, and associations. This is a real threat to freedom of expression and democracy, says Vanja Jurić, who writes in the RTL.hr Open Editorial about lawsuits filed by powerful officials, politicians, and businessmen against journalists who problematize their public activities.

A few years ago, the Croatian Journalist’s Association began to publish annual data on the number of proceedings against journalists, editors, and media publishers in Croatia. For the public, that number, which is around a thousand active proceedings, was probably shocking. However, Croatia has long been, at the European level, one of the countries where the media are exposed to the largest number of lawsuits. These are different types of proceedings, but most often lawsuits for damages, in which the media or journalists are asked to pay monetary compensation, due to the so-called mental pain. A significant number of these proceedings are initiated by politicians, officials, judges, powerful businessmen, and corporations because of texts written by journalists in which they problematize their public activities.

Current and former ministers sue the media for reporting discrepancies in their assets, officials file lawsuits over articles about their previous criminal convictions, large corporations seek damages to publish their e-mail correspondence with state leaders, judges sue for problematizing court decisions that have been enacted, and the public service for reporting on the program and spending taxpayer’s money.

Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation

More specifically, former Minister Tolusic filed a dozen lawsuits against various media outlets for reporting on his property cards, and Mijo Crnoja for reporting on land and soft loans granted to him ten years ago, although he has not built a house there to date. The Croatian National Tourist Board sued journalist Paul Bradbury and demanded HRK 50,000.00 for criticizing the promotional campaign they conducted, and Croatian Radio and Television initiated between twenty and thirty proceedings against its colleagues - media and journalists, for critical reporting on the situation on the public service. Likewise, a judge who released five suspects for serious crimes to defend himself from several media outlets is demanding amounts in excess of one million kuna, because they criticized such a decision, although his decision was later changed by a higher instance. This is only a small part of such examples.

What all these journalistic articles have in common is that they were justified, factually substantiated, verified, and about issues of significant public interest. All these procedures, if we adhere to the rights and case law, should be completed in favor of the media, and some of them already are.

Objects that have such characteristics are connected by a relatively new abbreviation SLAPP, which means the so-called Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation; and for which the European Commission, less than a month ago, appointed a special expert group, recognizing that this is a type of procedure that is characteristic of the entire EU and has consequences which are contrary to the fundamental values ​​of the European Union.

These are, therefore, lawsuits that are mainly directed against journalists, media, activists and their organizations, who, through their public actions, rightly and justifiably speak out on issues of public interest. It can be about uncovering various social or political affairs, criticizing the government, politicians, officials, or corporations; whose actions, for whatever reason, are important for society. Therefore, it is not just about the media, although they are most often from the other side of SLAPP. There are also a number of examples in Croatia in which the victims of such actions are NGOs, activists, and whistleblowers.

Financial exhaustion

Unlike other types of court proceedings, the primary goal of the so-called SLAPP lawsuits are not the protection of a right or interest of plaintiffs (and obtaining a court judgment by which these rights are exercised), but the prevailing belief is that their purpose is fulfilled by filing lawsuits, setting high lawsuits and conducting lengthy and often expensive court proceedings. One of the main characteristics of such lawsuits is that they are, in essence, unfounded; when it is clear from the beginning that there is no valid (factual and legal) basis and that the final success of the plaintiff in the proceedings is not likely. In these proceedings, which require the payment of damages of tens of thousands of kunas, almost completely regardless of their outcomes - longevity and financial exhaustion - attempts are made to put pressure on people or organizations that speak out about a social problem and thus, legally, punish and intimidate.

Given that the "larger" media are constantly exposed to court proceedings, in which the cumulative amounts claimed in lawsuits reach several million kunas, it is clear that this is serious pressure on them. The problem is even more obvious when individuals, such as journalists, activists, or non-profit media, are exposed to such lawsuits, and by initiating and conducting such proceedings, their existence is literally called into question.

Threat to freedom of expression

Through the work of domestic and international organizations dealing with the protection of freedom of expression and media freedom, this type of lawsuit - which in fact has always existed - has finally been named and recognized at the European Union level as a threat to freedom of expression. That is why an expert group of professionals from all over the EU has been appointed to advise the European Commission in the process of creating a system of protection against such lawsuits (both in terms of legislation and general policies) and the introduction of "safeguards" that will prevent or at least limit such lawsuits.

If we look only at Croatia, today or in the last thirty years, it should be completely clear that almost nothing that is really important (about politics, crime, social problems, and difficult affairs) we would not know without the media. We would know almost nothing about the assets of dismissed ministers, serious allegations of corruption and organized crime, health system problems in the fight against the coronavirus, or the shortcomings of the social welfare system.

Guard dogs

The point is that the role of the media, as well as the role of activists and organizations involved in detecting various social anomalies and informing the public about these problems, is completely irreplaceable in any democratic society. Without them, democracy, which implies public control over all political and social processes, simply does not exist. Without the so-called public watchdogs, which are the most common (or most visible) media, we would not know what is happening in society, and especially in politics. In Croatia, this example is so obvious, but only looking at the scandals that the media have discovered or helped to reveal and publish, in the last few years.

That is why, for any democratic society, it is necessary to protect freedom of expression and media freedom, as much as and for as long as it is necessary. It is about rights and freedoms that are, without any exaggeration, a precondition of any democracy. Likewise, protecting them not only means providing a “defense” in court proceedings, but also creating a social environment in which every journalist, media, and activist can work freely and independently. SLAPP lawsuits and the self-censorship they can cause are a symbol of the opposite of these values.

To read the original Croatian version of this article on RTL, click here.

April 11, 2021 - Saturday at the ATP Challenger Split Open concluded with an exciting final in the doubles competition in which Kazakhstani team Andrej Golubev and Aleksandr Nedovjesov won the title.

Golubev and Nedovjesov justified their first-seed role by winning the Split Open with a victory in the final against Szymon Walkow and Jan Zielinski from Poland 7:5, 6:7 (5), 10-5. In a dramatic and quality clash, the nuances really decided the result, and in the end, a series of three consecutive points for the Kazakhstani pair's 6-3 lead in the super tie break was crucial.

It was close in the first two sets, especially in the second when the Kazakh side failed to realize as many as seven break opportunities and the Polish team three. In the 13th game, Walkow and Zielinski won the third set, but the winning trophy still went to favored Golubev and Nedovjesov. This is the sixth joint title in the Challengers for the Kazakhstani pair. They will share 2,670 euros and 80 points, while the finalists will receive 1,550 euros and 48 points.

Both pairs stay in Split for the new Challenger next week - Golubev and Nedovjesov are the second seed in the draw and start against the Croatian team Borna Gojo - Nino Serdarušić, while Walkow and Zielinski go against the fourth seed Purava Raju and Tristan-Samuel Weissborn.

To follow the latest sports news in Croatia, follow TCN's dedicated page.

To learn more about sport in Croatia, CLICK HERE.