International Silence on a Press Freedom Scandal
A celebrated press freedom advocate is accused of using international influence to silence a critic, while organisations that endorsed her evade detailed questions demanding accountability.
In Kosovo’s fractured post-independence media and political landscape, few figures have commanded as much international prestige as Flutura Kusari, a senior legal adviser with the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) and a prominent member of the European anti-SLAPP steering committee. Her work has earned her accolades, endorsements from leading press freedom organisations, and even the German Federal Order of Merit1. But in recent months, her conduct in a deeply contentious case has raised urgent questions about whether the same power she has wielded to defend free expression has been deployed to silence it.
On 1 July 2025, Gunpowder Chronicles published2 a detailed investigation into Kusari’s failed criminal complaint against Kosovar citizen Mentor Llugaliu, a social media user whose satire and criticism she alleged amounted to harassment. The Basic Prosecution in Pristina dismissed the case outright, finding no contact, no threat, and no criminal act under Kosovo’s Criminal Code. One of the supposed offences that Llugaliu had referred to her by a satirical nickname was ruled as falling squarely within the bounds of protected speech.
As Gunpowder Chronicles reported on 1 July 2025, this “was not a case of harassment. It was a public figure attempting to use the courts to silence someone who disagreed with her.”
The investigation uncovered that, on the day she filed her complaint, Kusari orchestrated a wave of international endorsements, from IFEX, the International Press Institute (IPI), Index on Censorship, and her own ECPMF, framing her personal legal action as a global press freedom issue. Those endorsements, solicited and disseminated in parallel with her legal filing, were presented to prosecutors in what appeared to be an effort to shape the outcome before any legal assessment was made. As Gunpowder Chronicles put it, she was “weaponising respected foreign institutions to legitimise her claim and silence dissent”.
On 1 August, a second instalment followed3. This time, the focus was on her public naming of two Kosovo prosecutors, Kushtrim Zeka at the Basic Prosecution and Shkëlzen Brahimi at Appeal after both judicial levels dismissed her complaint. She accused them of failure, while allied NGOs, including QIKA4 and the Network of Women Journalists of Kosovo5, issued near-identical statements demanding their performance be reviewed. The report described this as “a public campaign to intimidate prosecutors… By naming prosecutors individually and framing their legal judgment as dereliction of duty, Kusari sent a message… side with her, or risk your career.”
The Gunpowder Chronicles editorial board then made a decision: to take the investigation further by engaging directly with all parties involved.
“We had to move beyond exposé into direct accountability,” said Chief Editor Vudi Xhymshiti. “These were not abstract claims, there were named individuals, international organisations, and even a foreign embassy taking positions during an active case.”
On 2 August, detailed formal questions were sent to Columbia Global Freedom of Expression, the IPI Secretariat, and the ECPMF, challenging the basis for their public support. Each organisation was asked whether they were aware the complaint had twice been dismissed for lacking legal merit; whether they considered the public naming of prosecutors compatible with international standards; whether due diligence had been conducted on Kusari’s silence in other genuine SLAPP cases; and what precedent such endorsements might set for press freedom bodies globally.
Columbia GFoE was asked point blank: “On what legal or factual basis did Columbia GFoE declare public solidarity with a figure whose actions, by documented analysis, include initiating a SLAPP-style complaint to silence criticism from a private citizen?”
IPI was pressed on whether it “still stood by” its statement that Kusari’s complaint was a matter of justice given two prosecutorial rejections, and whether it had independently verified her political claims about Llugaliu.
The ECPMF was asked to explain how its Senior Legal Adviser’s actions initiating legal action against a citizen, leveraging international pressure, and naming prosecutors after defeat aligned with its own Charter commitments.
None of these organisations replied to the initial request, nor to follow-up emails sent on 5 August.
Correspondence on Record6: Questions Sent to Press Freedom Organisations, Flutura Kusari, and the German Embassy.
The silence extended beyond NGOs. On 2 August, questions were sent directly to Kusari herself, including whether she acknowledged the case might now be viewed as legal intimidation, and whether she believed naming prosecutors was compatible with her EU-funded role. She was also asked about the deletion of a Facebook post calling for the punishment of another journalist, amid allegations that it was removed under pressure from figures linked to the Devolli media empire. She has not responded.
In parallel, the investigative team sought the voice of the accused. On 4 August, Llugaliu replied in full to ten questions.
“I have never, in any stage of my life, been a member of any political party in Kosovo,” he wrote. “What Ms Kusari claims is a deliberate fabrication to justify her attacks against me and to dilute my well-intentioned criticism against negative phenomena related to politics and its consequences in our society.”
He acknowledged that some of his satire “may have slightly crossed ethical boundaries” but insisted his criticism was “noble in purpose” and that two prosecutorial decisions had confirmed his speech was lawful.
By then, the reporting had reached diplomatic territory. The German Embassy in Pristina, which had publicly endorsed Kusari’s case on 21 June7, was contacted on 1 August with ten specific questions—among them, whether it considered her tactics compatible with press freedom values, whether it viewed public shaming of prosecutors as judicial intimidation, and whether it would reassess her Federal Order of Merit.
On 8 August, the Embassy replied, but only to say that its assessment of Kusari “differs from yours” and that it continued to “stand by our previously stated position and viewpoint”. No individual questions were answered. When pressed again to respond in substance, the Embassy referred back to its original statement. On 11 August, after sources indicated that Llugaliu had initiated legal proceedings over the Embassy’s June 21 post, Gunpowder Chronicles sent a second, sharper set of questions, explicitly asking whether the Embassy accepted it had caused unwarranted harm, whether it would remove the post, and whether it recognised that such conduct breached the presumption of innocence. A response is pending.
That most of the key actors international NGOs, a senior legal adviser, and a foreign mission have declined to answer questions on a matter involving public allegations, judicial intimidation, and the international framing of a domestic legal case is, in itself, revealing.
“This is not just about one citizen and one lawyer,” Xhymshiti said. “It’s about the public’s right to be fully and fairly informed when institutional power is used in ways that can shape the boundaries of free speech and the independence of the judiciary.”
The implications go beyond Kosovo. When foreign embassies and global press freedom bodies take sides in unresolved domestic legal disputes, they risk not only undermining judicial independence but also eroding public trust in the impartiality of the very institutions meant to defend democratic rights. The unanswered questions about due diligence, neutrality, and the selective defence of principles are now as much part of the story as the original complaint.
The German Embassy’s involvement will be addressed in full in an upcoming Gunpowder Chronicles in-depth reporting analysis, which will examine how diplomatic endorsement intersects with domestic legal processes, and what happens when the two collide.
How a Press Freedom Icon Became a Political Actor
In Kosovo’s turbulent post-independence political landscape, where trust in institutions is fragile and the line between advocacy and partisanship often blurs, one of the loudest voices claiming to defend press freedom is now accused of trying to silence it.
Press Release - Dr. Flutura Kusari receives the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany — German Embassy, Prishtina, Kosovo.
How a Press Freedom Icon Became a Political Actor
Flutura Kusari built a reputation defending press freedom. Now, she stands accused of using that same power to silence a citizen who challenged her. — The GPC I Unit.
The Advocate Who Intimidates: Flutura Kusari’s War on Prosecutors
By naming prosecutors and silencing critics, Flutura Kusari of ECPMF doesn’t fight for press freedom, she tramples it under ego, ambition, and the shadow of the Devolli empire. — The GPC Media Watch.
QIKA’s — Facebook Post.
NWJK (Rrjeti i Grave Gazetare të Kosovës) — Facebook Post.
By publishing these documents, we ensure the public can see precisely what was asked, to whom, and when. This transparency is vital: it allows readers to judge for themselves whether the lack of substantive responses from certain parties reflects a refusal to engage on the facts, and it underscores why a free press must press for answers even when power prefers silence.
German Embassy in Prishtina Facebook Post.
The Advocate Who Intimidates: Flutura Kusari’s War on Prosecutors
In the fragile democracy of Kosovo, where the law still fights to breathe above the suffocating weight of oligarchs, Flutura Kusari presents herself as a defender of justice and press freedom. Yet her repeated actions expose not a guardian of rights but an operator willing to submit the very idea of rule of law to her own will, using networks of power and influence tied to one of the most entrenched oligarchies in the Balkans.