A Zagreb lawyer received a frightening letter full of insults and threats: "Are you still alive?"

A Zagreb-based lawyer has received a threatening letter filled with insults and hate speech, according to local media reports. The letter was sent to attorney Lina Budak, who revealed she had received the message and informed Interior Minister Davor Božinović about it. The communication included explicit language and references to Croatian nationalist groups, raising concerns over threats against legal professionals involved in anti-fascist activism. The letter, which was reportedly sent via postal service from Osijek, bore the signature “ustaše,” a term historically associated with Croatian fascist movements during World War II. It contained personal attacks directed at Budak, accusing her of harboring hatred toward everything Croatian and suggesting that this internal conflict would lead to her downfall. The sender claimed satisfaction in witnessing Budak’s anguish and expressed intent to retaliate against her, referencing her work defending individuals linked to so-called anti-fascist groups. According to the letter, dated July 5, 2026—what appears to be the anniversary of a concert by musician Thompson, the sender accused Budak of supporting activities related to “anti-Hrvatski” (anti-Croatian), Chetnik, and self-proclaimed anti-fascist groups. The text also referenced Budak's defense of Mileta, organizer of the peaceful gathering “United Against Fascism” held on November 30, 2025, which resulted in Mileta being acquitted of charges by the Zagreb Municipal Administrative Court. Budak represents the weekly newspaper Novosti and its journalists in their legal matters. Budak informed Božinović that she had previously received similar threats from the same anonymous sender a year ago. She noted that police have yet to provide updates on any actions taken following her earlier complaint. This incident adds to growing concerns regarding the safety of legal professionals engaged in sensitive political cases, particularly those involving anti-fascist advocacy. The letter specifically targeted Budak’s role in representing Novosti, a publication known for its critical stance on far-right ideologies. The sender accused her of defending individuals such as Mileta free of charge, implying a connection to other figures associated with alleged Chetnik networks. These allegations were presented in a highly inflammatory tone, using profanity and historical references to justify the threat. Budak’s case highlights the ongoing tensions surrounding legal representation in politically charged trials. Her involvement in defending activists and journalists has placed her under scrutiny from groups perceived as opposing anti-fascist efforts. The nature of the threats suggests a deep-seated animosity towards her professional work, particularly in cases involving high-profile defendants. Authorities have been urged to investigate the origins of the letter and ensure the safety of those working in the legal field. Budak’s decision to inform the minister underscores the gravity of the situation, especially given the lack of progress in previous complaints. The incident has sparked discussions about the need for stronger protections for legal practitioners facing intimidation due to their roles in sensitive cases. The letter’s content and its timing raise questions about the broader context of political discourse in Croatia. While the government has emphasized the importance of upholding the rule of law, incidents like these challenge the perception of security within the justice system. Legal experts have called for increased awareness and measures to prevent such threats from escalating further. The case continues to unfold as authorities examine the circumstances surrounding the letter. Meanwhile, Budak remains focused on her duties, determined to continue advocating for clients despite the risks involved. The situation reflects a complex interplay between legal practice, political ideology, and public safety, all of which require careful attention from both the judiciary and law enforcement.