The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Rodoljub Šabić, reacted to an interview given by Aleksandar Tijanić, the director of RTS (Radio Television of Serbia), published in the daily paper ''Večernje novosti'' on Monday, June 2. In relation to the part of the interview in which Tijanić commented on the order given by the Commissioner for the RTS to make public, i.e. to forward to the Committee of jurists for human rights, the EUROSONG budget, which it had requested, Rodoljub Šabić said:
''The director of RTS expressed a series of disqualifications and offences on my account in an interview he had probably ordered, the content of which was later also broadcast by RTS, saying among other things that I am someone's messenger or stooge. Yet, this is not the reason for my reaction. I have already had the opportunity to be exposed to similiar verbal attacks by some public figures of similar mental constitution. I had not reacted to primitivism on those occasions, nor will I do so now. I believe that primitivism and cheap attempts to disqualify always speak best about those who use them and that thus reactions are unnecessary.
However, the director of RTS showed by this statement, besides the above mentioned, some other things to which I must react. It is not a private matter of a man who is the director of an informative public service, the fact that he does not have an elementary idea about the obligations which he has to the public according to the law. The same applies to his incapability to distinguish between the budget and the balance of the budget and particularly to his quite obvious disinformation given to the public.
The director of RTS is playing very plainly on the card of animosity which part of the public has against non-government organisations, an animosity which the public service under his management supports irresponsibly. He therefore points out that such information was requested by the non-government organisation with the president of which the director of RTS is in conflict for a long time. He is absolutely subjective and as such tries to also impute some subjectivity to the commissioner for information. And it is perfectly clear to anybody who has even little objectivity, that it is absolutely irrelevant who requests information. Because whoever it is, the undisputable fact is, that the financing of an event which cost millions of euros of public money, must be public.
The director of RTS also disinforms the public with respect to the subject of my order and the time for its materialization by the statement ''he discredited his function requesting us to complete the budget balance calculation within three days''. However, no balance nor report was requested, on the contrary the request was made for the EUROSONG budget. Thus, the document which gives the plan, forecast of the required funds for financing the event, a document which must be prepared for each big event, certainly months before it takes place.
In accordance with the above, the party requesting the information reverted to RTS back on March 31. RTS ignored this request all 15 days which it had at its disposal, and when the complaint was expressed, it acted more or less in the same manner despite the request made by the Commissioner that they make a statement, thus they did not give their stand at all with respect to the budget. The commissioner did not resolve the filed complaint within the legal timeframe, due to the enormous inflow of cases. This was done afterwards, with the issuance of the respective order. The director of RTS now expresses doubts with his statements as to whether the EUROSONG budget exists at all. However, the possible non-existence of such a document leads to an extremely unpleasant conclusion - that the EUROSONG was financed following the principle ''take as much as you like'', without any plan.
It is obvious that the document for which RTS says that it has ''three months for Minister Dinkić and the organisation board to first accept the report, and then afterwards for the documents to pass the RTS Board of Directors'', it is clear that this should be a report about the materialization of the budget. No one has asked for this for the time being, and it would be good that it be presented on the RTS web site, before anyone asks for it, which should have been done a long time ago with the budget.
Contrary to the director of RTS, I am not a cynic nor a misanthrope. And thus as a citizen and a political figure in this country I can wish him that this report be acceptable not just for the authorities, behind which it seems that the director already intends to find shelter, but also for the entire public. However, I know from experience that rude, almost panicky nervous reaction to the order of the commissioner for information does not increase in the least the chances for it to be so, on the contrary.
