EVIDENCE THAT THE BH JOURNALISTS ASSOCIATION DEFAMATORILY ATTACKED MIRNES AJANOVIĆ FOR POINTING OUT ANISA MAHMUTOVIĆ'S PARTY – AFFILIATED ACTIVITIES
WERE INTERNATIONAL JOURNALIST ORGANISATIONS ALSO MISLED?
WAS ANISA MAHMUTOVIĆ'S YEARS-LONG AUTHOR ARCHIVE OF CONTENT PRODUCED FOR THE RULING SDA PARTY IN TUZLA CANTON WITHHELD FROM THEM?
Dokumentovano.ba
Author/Editor – Journalist Danijel Senkić
THE EVIDENCE OF THE DEFAMATORY ATTACK AGAINST MIRNES SPEAKS LOUDER THAN ANY COMMENTARY
When the BH Journalists Association issued its statement on 14 May 2026, responding to Mirnes Ajanović's claims regarding Anisa Mahmutović's political ties to the SDA, as well as his assertion that her public involvement in matters related to the actions of Tuzla Canton SDA Minister of Education Ahmed Omerović raises legitimate questions about the political background of such engagement, the Association presented Anisa Mahmutović to the public as a completely independent and politically neutral individual who was allegedly being discredited by claims that she cooperates with the SDA.
However, publicly available documentation now shows that Anisa Mahmutović, under her full name, is listed as the author of years of continuous content published on the official website of the SDA Tuzla City Board. This extensive multi-page author archive contains a large number of publications relating to SDA activities, SDA officials, and the political activities of the SDA, the party currently governing Tuzla Canton.
This raises a legitimate question as to whether the BH Journalists Association, as well as the organisations to which it distributed its information, possessed all relevant facts at the moment they publicly defended Anisa Mahmutović and launched a defamatory attack against Mirnes Ajanović for drawing attention to her documented years-long activity through official SDA party channels — or whether they were aware of these facts and chose to withhold them from the public.
PUBLICLY AVAILABLE EVIDENCE
Publicly available documents provide evidence that cannot be disputed.
On the official website of the SDA Tuzla City Board, there is an author archive entitled:
“Author – Anisa Mahmutović”
Link:https://sdatuzla.ba/author/anisam/
The archive extends across multiple pages:
https://sdatuzla.ba/author/anisam/page/2/
https://sdatuzla.ba/author/anisam/page/3/
https://sdatuzla.ba/author/anisam/page/4/
ANISA MAHMUTOVIĆ'S YEARS-LONG ARCHIVE OF PARTY-RELATED CONTENT
This is not a single publication or an isolated article.
It is a multi-page, continuous, years-long author archive containing a large number of publications relating to SDA activities, party meetings, SDA officials, the SDA Youth Association, the recruitment of new party members, and other political activities of the ruling party in Tuzla Canton.
Therefore, it is an indisputable fact that Anisa Mahmutović, under her own name and surname, is identified as the author of content published on the official SDA website.
WHY DOES THIS MATTER?
Because the public was led to believe that drawing attention to the political background of Anisa Mahmutović's activities constituted an impermissible attack on journalists — that the truth itself was an attack on journalists.
However, raising questions about the political affiliations of a person who publicly presents herself as independent while participating in matters of significant public interest is a legitimate issue of public concern.
This is particularly true when that person publicly intervenes in matters involving support for unlawful decisions of the Tuzla Canton Ministry of Education and Science and its SDA Minister Ahmed Omerović — that is, the ruling authorities in Tuzla Canton.
It is also noteworthy that Ahmed Omerović appears in numerous photographs and reports published by Anisa Mahmutović on the official SDA website.
THE PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW ALL RELEVANT FACTS
No one has the right to conceal documented facts from the public or to attack anyone for presenting the truth.
Just as the public has the right to know the political background of every politician, public official, adviser, activist, or any other public figure, it also has the right to know whether a person presenting herself as an independent commentator or analyst previously participated in creating and publishing content for official political party websites.
That is not an attack.
That is not discrediting someone.
That is a fact.
THE FACTS ARE UNDISPUTED
Publicly available documentation proves:
- that Anisa Mahmutović is identified as a long-term and continuous author on the official SDA website;
- that there exists an extensive multi-page archive of articles published under her name;
- that these publications relate to the promotion of SDA activities and membership recruitment;
- that her engagement was continuous and long-term, rather than occasional or sporadic;
- that during the session of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina's Commission for the Fight Against Corruption on 11 May 2026, Anisa Mahmutović presented false claims that the unjustly targeted University Kallos had no licence and therefore no legal authorisation to operate, despite the fact that the Cantonal Court in Tuzla, on 31 December 2024, suspended the enforcement of the decision issued by SDA Minister Ahmed Omerović (No. 10/1-34-030943-24), and subsequently annulled that decision on 8 May 2026 as unlawful (Case No. 03 0 U 025256 24 U). Furthermore, due to the unlawful endangerment of the University's operations, an official investigation is being conducted against the Minister by the Federal Prosecutor's Office – Special Department for the Suppression of Corruption, Organised and Inter-Cantonal Crime (POSKOK) under reference No. T 21 0 KT 000483 25.
Documents speak louder than statements.
Facts are always stronger than attempts to suppress them.
In this particular case, the BH Journalists Association publicly came to the defence of Anisa Mahmutović while simultaneously launching a defamatory attack against attorney Mirnes Ajanović, without presenting to the public facts relevant to assessing her political and media engagement, including her documented years-long activity through the official SDA website.
This raises a legitimate question as to whether the BH Journalists Association possessed complete information regarding Anisa Mahmutović's role and engagement within the SDA when it issued its public statements.
If those facts concerning her engagement with the SDA were known, then the public has the right to ask why they were not presented together with the other circumstances on which the Association based its reaction, and why Mirnes Ajanović was attacked as a result.
If those facts were not known, then legitimate questions arise regarding professional responsibility and the failure to conduct even the most basic verification before publicly attacking attorney Mirnes Ajanović and portraying his truthful statements as an attack on journalists.
What is beyond dispute is that publicly available documents confirm Anisa Mahmutović's years-long authorship and engagement on the official SDA website. For that reason, it is entirely legitimate to raise questions regarding the political background of her public activities in state-level matters of significant public interest.
Let the court of public opinion decide for itself whether the reactions of the BH Journalists Association were based on complete facts and whether the public was presented with a full picture of the individual whose defence they chose to undertake.
We will continue with new articles and new evidence in defence of truth and honourable journalism, and in doing so demonstrate that we are not the same as those within that Association.
DID INTERNATIONAL JOURNALIST ORGANISATIONS RECEIVE THE FULL STORY — OR WERE THEY MISLED AS WELL?
It is particularly important to ask whether the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), the Council of Europe Platform for the Protection of Journalism, and other international organisations were informed of the fact that Anisa Mahmutović, under her own name, was identified as the author of years of content published on the official website of the SDA (Party of Democratic Action).
The public does not know whether these facts were included in the information submitted to international organisations.
What is beyond dispute today is that publicly available documentation demonstrates the existence of a years-long author archive published under the name of Anisa Mahmutović on the official SDA Tuzla website, as well as her continuous involvement in creating and publishing content relating to the activities of the political party that governs Tuzla Canton.
However, this article does not challenge anyone's right to hold political views or affiliations.
Everyone has the right to be a member of the SDA, to support the SDA, to work for the SDA, or to spend years publishing content for the SDA on its official political platform.
What no one has the right to do, however, is conceal those facts from the public while simultaneously demanding to be regarded as a completely independent and politically neutral actor.
The public has the right to know all relevant circumstances.
That is precisely why this article will be translated into English and submitted to the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), the Council of Europe Platform for the Protection of Journalism, and other relevant international organisations, including associations dedicated to the protection of independent journalism and the freedom of journalists and media outlets that have not placed themselves in the service of political power, so that they may have access to the complete facts.
Let everyone, in Bosnia and Herzegovina and beyond, draw their own conclusions based on documented facts regarding the independence, political affiliations, and transparency of Anisa Mahmutović's public activities.
The public has the same right to know the facts of political engagement when a person presents herself in public as an independent journalist, an independent analyst, or an impartial observer of events.
The problem is not a journalist's political affiliation.
The problem begins when years of activity through official party channels are withheld from the public, while drawing attention to documented facts is portrayed as an attack on journalism or a threat to media freedom.
Journalism is not protected by concealing facts from the public.
On the contrary.
Journalism is protected through full transparency.
For that reason, once again, the public has the right to know that Anisa Mahmutović was identified as the author of years of content published on the official SDA website and to determine, on the basis of those facts, whether her activities in state-level matters of public interest can genuinely be regarded as completely independent and politically neutral — particularly when false claims are being advanced that mirror the false and unlawful actions previously undertaken by SDA Minister Ahmed Omerović.
Presenting documented facts is not an attack on journalism.
Presenting documented facts is the very essence of journalism.
Its purpose is to ensure that everyone has access to the complete facts.
Because protecting journalism also means protecting the truth.
And protecting the truth requires that all relevant circumstances be presented to domestic and international institutions, as well as to the public.
Let the court of public opinion reach its own conclusion.
The documents exist.
The evidence exists.
The links exist. The archive exists.
The facts speak for themselves.