The problem stems from Croatia evidently having a "private prosecutor" procedure. I can't help but think this stems from the Yugoslav Wars era and the aftermath in the late 90s. Countries like Croatia and Bosnia were devastated. There had to have been people guilty of crimes such as destruction of property, looting and false imprisonment. Basically, too small of potatoes to be hauled in front of a tribunal in The Hague. People were angry and wanted a more direct way of getting justice instead of making a complaint to the police and hoping they have the resources to prosecute.
The private prosecutor feature in the Croatian courts seems to be a result of this. Also, since many of the culprits were from Bosnia or Serbia, there was likely an issue of jurisdiction which was covered by the law. What they didn't intend was for this method to be used to prosecute foreigners for what amounts to digital insults on the internet.
That is precisely what Cora Latham is being sued for. She made no videos and did not appear in her husband's two videos. No, she's being sued because of snarky and insulting tweets and retweeting some of what Kim and others tweeted.
Look at Twitter, especially now that Musk has taken over. As you read this, thousands of insulting tweets, some with information which is not accurate are being sent. Imagine the legal chaos if even 25% of those were privately prosecuted over international borders.
The issue of extortion would have to be based on what the law is in Croatia. Since they allow private prosecution, this is not likely extortion. Is it extortion in countries without private prosecution? Probably.
Take Lloyd's statement from 10 June (which is still up):
(2) The warning letters were non-negotiable and purely a part of the pre-trial process. They were not an intimidation strategy. My lawyers informed me there was no legal compulsion to send them but it would weigh in my favor if I gave those defaming me an opportunity to stop and make recompense. None of the defendants who received warning letters heeded them so we can move straight from pre-trial to the trial stage. In other words, there was one acceptable response to the warning letters, i.e. "I/we apologise and will comply with your request." Since no response of that kind was forthcoming, the lawsuit was filed.
He offered a settlement option but did not conduct it in good faith. No counter-offers were acceptable to him. People were either to pay him €3000 or €8000 and take down all content related to him or be sued. All damages were arbitrarily set by him. Countries without private prosecutor laws would definitely count that as extortion had it happened in their countries. This is why the whole lawsuit suing people with absolutely no connection with Croatia is going to be so fruitless. It might be legal in Croatia, but it won't fly in most other countries.
Evans has taunted several of his targets by sarcastically advising them to get a "good" Croatian lawyer. This comment actually has a point. The only way there is a trial is if the accused can be tricked into hiring a Croatian lawyer. This could be taken as tacit acknowledgement that they are indeed liable under Croatian laws and procedures.