Anti-money laundering administration ran checks on journalists and NGOs

Category: Persecution

Period: from Jul 2020

Outcome: No one investigated (as of 8 Feb 2025)

In July 2020, the Administration for the Prevention of Money Laundering within the Ministry of Finance asked banks for data on all transactions of 37 organisations and 20 individuals, among them investigative media outlets, journalists' associations and government watchdog organisations. The authorities called it a routine risk assessment, while the people on the list called it intimidation of critics; UN special rapporteurs found that applying the law in this way was incompatible with Serbia's obligations. According to the editor of Nova ekonomija, the results of the checks were never published, and according to Civic Initiatives, a criminal complaint over the leaking of the data to a tabloid was dismissed.

List of organisations and journalists

In July 2020, the Administration for the Prevention of Money Laundering, which operates within the Ministry of Finance headed by minister Siniša Mali, asked banks for data on all transactions since 1 January 2019 for 37 organisations and associations and 20 individuals. The stated grounds were to determine whether they had links to terrorist financing or money laundering.

The list included investigative media outlets and journalists' associations (KRIK, CINS, BIRN, NUNS, UNS), government watchdog organisations (CRTA, Civic Initiatives, YUCOM, BCSP) and journalists Branko Čečen, Slobodan Georgiev and Biljana Stepanović.

Routine check or intimidation

The Administration and minister Mali claimed it was a routine risk assessment and that the Administration had also checked ministers; President Vučić called it "the most ordinary checks". The people on the list described it as intimidation of government critics, and Amnesty International as "an unmistakable act of intimidation".

The Ombudsman announced a review of the Administration's conduct; no outcome of that review could be found.

Findings of the UN, FATF and MONEYVAL

In November 2020, UN special rapporteurs found that applying the law in this way was incompatible with Serbia's obligations under international law, and according to media reports, FATF and MONEYVAL concluded that the financial intelligence unit cannot request data from banks without grounds for suspicion.

According to Civic Initiatives, a criminal complaint filed by the organisations on the list over the leaking of their data to a tabloid was dismissed. According to the editor of Nova ekonomija, speaking in February 2025, the results of the checks were never published.

Checks on five activists

In late 2024 and early 2025, the Administration for the Prevention of Money Laundering asked all banks for data on the accounts of five activists, prompting UN rapporteurs to write to the government in April 2025.

In the MONEYVAL report, as quoted by Civic Initiatives, the authorities linked the checks to a preliminary investigation into American donations and said they had not led to any action. Civic Initiatives says that response is misleading, because the checks began before that preliminary investigation.

Participants

Administration for the Prevention of Money Laundering (Ministry of Finance): It asked banks for all transactions of 20 media workers and NGO figures and 37 organisations; according to the criminal complaint, it gave the data to Srpski telegraf (responsible)
Željko Radovanović: He said there was no discrimination, that ministers had been checked too, and that this was a risk analysis, not a check on critics (commented on the case)
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Serbia: The Administration for the Prevention of Money Laundering, which operates within the ministry, asked banks for the transactions of 20 people and 37 organisations (commented on the case)
Siniša Mali: He defended the Administration's work, called the reactions a “political rampage” and said there was no problem if nothing was being hidden (commented on the case)
Aleksandar Vučić: He said these were “the most ordinary checks” and that four ministers had also been processed by the Administration (commented on the case)
Srpski telegraf: According to a criminal complaint by five organisations, the Administration unlawfully supplied the newsroom with data on their transactions (commented on the case)
Branko Čečen: Director of CINS, on the list; called the check an abuse of institutions (harmed)
Slobodan Georgiev: Director of Newsmax Adria, on the list; published the list (harmed)
Biljana Stepanović: Editor-in-chief of Nova ekonomija, on the list; says in 2025 that the results were never published (harmed)
KRIK: On the Administration's list (harmed)
CINS (Centre for Investigative Journalism of Serbia): On the Administration's list (harmed)
BIRN: On the Administration's list (harmed)
CRTA (Centre for Research, Transparency and Accountability): On the Administration's list (harmed)
Independent Journalists' Association of Serbia (NUNS): On the Administration's list; signatory to the demand that the findings be published (harmed)
Journalists' Association of Serbia: On the Administration's list (harmed)
Civic Initiatives: On the Administration's list; called the check a misuse of a legal mechanism; filed a criminal complaint in 2021 (harmed)
Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights (YUCOM): On the Administration's list; signatory to the demand that the findings be published and to the 2021 criminal complaint (harmed)
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy: On the Administration's list; filed a criminal complaint in 2021 (harmed)
Nova ekonomija: On the Administration's list (harmed)
Newsmax Adria: On 27 July, published the list of media outlets, associations and journalists whose accounts the Administration had requested from banks (oversight and the public)
Zoran Pašalić: He announced a review of the list, said the Administration was acting in line with the law, and said he would respond if the conditions were not met (oversight and the public)
Protector of Citizens (Ombudsman): He announced a review of the Administration's procedure, saying it was acting in line with the law and that he would respond if the conditions were not met (oversight and the public)
Rodoljub Šabić: He said the law allows account data only where there is suspicion and has no notion of a „routine check“ (oversight and the public)
Amnesty International: It called the check „an undoubted act of intimidation“ and demanded that the investigation be halted (oversight and the public)
European Commission: It asked the authorities for the criteria used to compile the list and for more information on the Administration's request (oversight and the public)
UN Human Rights Council (independent experts): They said that applying the law broadly to obtain banking data was incompatible with Serbia's obligations (oversight and the public)
Financial Action Task Force (FATF): It said that requests made without reasonable suspicion are not in line with FATF standards (oversight and the public)
MONEYVAL (Council of Europe Committee of Experts on combating money laundering): According to YUCOM, it stressed that the agency cannot request data from banks without suspicion of money laundering (oversight and the public)