Wealthy Foreigners Paid Weekend Safaris to Kill Civilians in Sarajevo

Authorities and survivors are reacting after a 2022 Slovenian documentary alleged that during the 1992–1996 Sarajevo siege, wealthy foreigners paid to join Bosnian Serb positions and shoot at civilians for sport. The film, Sarajevo Safari, directed by Miran Zupanič, presents testimonies describing a grim “human safari” in which “tourist shooters” traveled—often via Belgrade and then to Serb-controlled Pale—to take sniper posts around the surrounded city. The claims point to a commercial system that turned the killing of residents into a paid weekend activity, raising new pressure on prosecutors and governments named in the accounts.

The documentary reports that participants came from Italy, Russia, Canada 🇨🇦, and the United States 🇺🇸, among other countries, and that fees were allegedly collected to arrange their access to frontlines controlled by Bosnian Serb forces. Testimonies cited by the film describe foreigners arriving with local help, being driven to vantage points above tram lines and markets, and firing at people attempting everyday tasks like crossing streets or fetching water.

Survivors who endured the shelling and sniper fire said the revelations cut open old wounds — not only because of the cruelty, but because they suggest a market existed for killing civilians inside a European capital.

Allegations, routes and organization described in the film

• The film describes a travel corridor: foreigners flying to Belgrade, then traveling to Pale, and onward to sniper lines around Sarajevo.
• Testimonies say logistics and safe passage were often arranged through Serbian security-linked networks and commercial firms operating across the former Yugoslavia.
• The documentary alleges a “tariff” system for targets — civilians, soldiers, even children — with different fees attached to different victims.
• Witness accounts repeatedly use the term “human safari” to describe a pastime that dehumanized victims.

If proven, the coordination described would indicate an organized system rather than isolated individual misdeeds. However, legal thresholds for proving command responsibility and organized criminal facilitation are high.

Italian links, investigations, and intelligence references

• Italian media and judicial sources have acknowledged that investigations were opened into whether Italian nationals took part.
• Witness statements gathered since 1993 referenced Italians from Turin, Milan, and Trieste acting as snipers in or near Sarajevo.
• According to reporting cited by the film, travel and logistics were arranged through Serbian security-linked networks and commercial firms.
• The film says some Italians admitted paying to reach the front, while local fixers and volunteers reportedly smoothed the path to firing positions.

Italy’s intelligence service at the time, SISMI (now AISE), was reportedly notified of the allegations during the conflict. Documentation referenced in later reporting indicates SISMI claimed it located an Italian “point of origin” for arranging trips and said the network had been “neutralized.” However:

• Formal prosecutions tied specifically to these human safari claims have not followed.
• Italian judicial files remain at an early stage.
• Some evidence was reportedly shared with Italian authorities in the mid-1990s, but it did not result in trials centered on the human safari allegations.

For families in Sarajevo who still mourn loved ones lost to snipers, the gap between public revelations and courtroom action remains a familiar frustration.

Evidence, challenges and investigative focus

Investigators and analysts focus on several practical elements mentioned in the film and witness accounts:

• Who issued tickets and travel documents?
• Who arranged vehicles and safe houses?
• Which companies or intermediaries coordinated logistics?
• Which vantage points and neighborhoods were used by the shooters?

Italian investigators have reportedly collected statements naming specific neighborhoods and vantage points. The accounts include mentions of travel coordination through companies tied to former Yugoslav networks, and fees that changed hands before access to lines facing Sarajevo was granted.

Legal experts note several obstacles to turning these allegations into prosecutions:

• Passage of time and fading memories
• Witness security and willingness to testify
• Difficulty accessing sensitive intelligence files and cross-border business records
• Necessity of corroborating documentary and forensic evidence that can survive legal scrutiny

“It means we weren’t just targets—we were trophies,” a survivor said in testimony cited by the film, capturing the bitterness still felt in the city’s apartment blocks and hillside cemeteries.

Domestic prosecution status and official avenues

Officials in Bosnia and Herzegovina have not confirmed any parallel domestic prosecutions linked directly to the film’s claims. War crimes cases remain active, and prosecutors say they continue to receive new information from witnesses and media investigations.

• The Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina has jurisdiction over complex wartime cases and appeals to the public to share credible leads.
• Its public updates are the most reliable indicator of progress, even when specific allegations are not named in communiqués.
• For official information on ongoing war crimes prosecutions, see: Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

International context and legal implications

The film’s 2022 premiere drew immediate international coverage because it reframed the siege in moral and economic terms. Human rights lawyers note:

• If a “tariff” for civilians or children were proven, it could fit definitions of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
• Documentary testimony and media reports need corroboration by records, intelligence, and witness testimony before charges can be filed.

Analysis by VisaVerge.com and similar reviews of wartime allegations often show patterns re-emerging years later, when survivors and journalists assemble travel patterns and names and compare them with historical records. In this case, the mention of specific Italian cities and a Belgrade corridor explains why investigators focus on tracing tickets, vehicles, and safe houses.

Impact on Sarajevo’s memory and survivors

For many Sarajevans, the documentary adds another painful layer to the city’s memory culture. Residents accepted the cruelty of snipers as a wartime fact; the idea that outsiders may have paid for the chance to shoot at civilians is a different, more personal assault on dignity.

• Families hope renewed attention will prompt witness cooperation and, ultimately, legal clarity.
• In the absence of indictments, the allegations remain in a painful middle ground: deeply plausible to those who lived under the guns, yet still awaiting judicial confirmation.

What comes next

The claims challenge states named in the film to explain both past actions and present responses. In Italy, the remark that intelligence had “neutralized” an origin point hints at a trail investigators could still follow. Whether that trail leads to courtrooms depends on evidence that can withstand:

• the distance of time,
• political pressures,
• and the complications of cross-border cooperation.

For now, the voices recorded in Sarajevo Safari have ensured that the story of the “tourist shooters” will not fade quietly.