Serbia Prosecution Faces Allegations of Mishandling Anti-Government Protester Cases
A Supreme Public Prosecution report reveals systemic irregularities and political bias in Belgrade.
1Commission Exposes Prosecutorial Irregularities
A commission from Serbia’s Supreme Public Prosecution Office released a report on Tuesday detailing significant irregularities within the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade. The findings suggest that the office, led by Nenad Stefanovic, operated a parallel system that compromised legal standards during several high-profile cases involving anti-government protesters and activists.
2Sonic Weapon Investigation Failures
The report highlights the mishandling of an investigation into an alleged sonic weapon used during a March 2025 protest. While 300,000 people gathered, a sudden noise caused a stampede. The prosecution dismissed criminal proceedings in September 2025, ignoring material evidence and prioritizing a pre-determined conclusion that no acoustic weapon was deployed.
3Systemic Bias and Instrumentalization
Investigators identified that the Belgrade office instrumentalized specific prosecutors to achieve illegitimate political objectives. The report documents clear bias, including unlawful searches, illegal seizures, and the collection of irrelevant data. Furthermore, the office allegedly restricted the rights of injured parties and abused hierarchical powers to suppress dissent against the authorities.
4Surveillance of Protest Witnesses
In June 2026, the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office requested the Security Intelligence Agency, BIA, to conduct checks on 154 citizens. These individuals had provided statements regarding the alleged sound cannon incident. This move is cited as an example of using prosecutorial authority to intimidate witnesses and monitor critics of the government.
5Political Context of Investigation
The commission was established on October 27, shortly after the opposition Student List defeated the Serbian Progressive Party in parliamentary elections. This political shift ended 14 years of rule by the incumbent party. The report focuses on seven specific cases, though officials suggest this is likely the first of several upcoming inquiries.
6Prosecutor Rejects Findings as Retaliation
Nenad Stefanovic, head of the Belgrade office, rejected the report's allegations as entirely unfounded. He characterized the investigation as a political maneuver, questioning whether the commission aimed to ensure legal consistency or if it was merely a tool for the Supreme Public Prosecutor to settle personal scores with his office's leadership.
7Counter-Complaints and Legal Escalation
Stefanovic has filed a criminal complaint against Goran Ilic, the Supreme Public Prosecutor who chairs the commission. He accuses Ilic of abuse of office and obstruction of justice, alleging that Ilic interfered with his duties and pressured him to resign. The case has now been forwarded to the Office for Organised Crime.
8Implications for Judicial Integrity
This conflict highlights deep divisions within Serbia’s judicial system following the recent change in government. The allegations of a parallel prosecutorial structure suggest a significant erosion of institutional independence. Future proceedings will determine if these findings lead to criminal charges or further destabilize the nation's legal framework and public trust.