Miloš Pejatović wanted to work as an assistant waiter on Korčula. Instead of a summer season on the Adriatic, he got a deportation order, seven days to leave voluntarily and a three-year ban on entering Croatia. The reason? Instagram posts.

The story has been unfolding since late 2019, but the final full stop was put by Croatia's Constitutional Court only now, rejecting his appeal. The Croatian Interior Ministry had denied his work-permit request after the security-intelligence agency SOA assessed that this Serbian citizen posed a threat to national security and public order.

According to the authorities, Pejatović had posted content on Instagram from positions they characterized as „Greater Serbian” - posts which, they claim, threatened violence against Croatia's territorial integrity and constitutional order and could disturb inter-ethnic relations.

Pejatović defended himself, saying he was no security threat, and challenged the legality of the procedure. But his strongest argument wasn't about the content of the posts - it was about something every Balkan citizen ought to understand: he had no access to the secret information on the basis of which he was assessed as a threat. How do you defend yourself against evidence you're not allowed to see?

The secret evidence and the right to a defense

The Constitutional Court did not agree. It ruled that the administrative bodies and the lower courts had sufficient grounds for their decisions, that Pejatović was familiar with the reasoning and had the opportunity to respond. As for the limited access to SOA's secret data, the court concluded that this did not violate the right to a fair trial - because the administrative courts had reviewed those materials and upheld the ministry's decision.

With that, the Constitutional Court confirmed the earlier rulings of the Administrative Court in Split and the High Administrative Court. Legally - the case is closed.

But the question that remains is bigger than one waiter and one season. Where is the line between protecting the state and a person's right to see what they're defending themselves against? The Balkans has a long and painful experience with states that know everything about the citizen, while the citizen isn't allowed to know anything about their files. When a secret service claims someone is a threat, and the evidence stays under lock and key - a heavy burden falls on the courts: to trust, or to check. This time they chose to trust.