In a scathing critique of Serbia’s judicial governance, prominent Prosecutor Goran Ilić has publicly condemned the recent decision by the High Prosecutorial Council (VST) to mass-transfer lower-level prosecutors into higher public offices, exposing it as a desperate institutional capture orchestrated before strict new laws take effect.
Speaking live on N1’s Dan Uživo, Ilić characterized the Council’s maneuvers as a “truli kompromis” (rotten compromise) and a strategic “podela plena” (divvying up of the spoils). He warned that insiders are intentionally exploiting a closing window of opportunity before upcoming legislative reforms—vetted by European legal experts—come into effect to permanently ban this controversial practice.
1. The “Jagma” Phenomenon: Exploiting the Legal Vacuum
Ilić used a harsh historical parallel to describe how internal factions are rushing to secure higher-level positions for political and institutional loyalists before upcoming legislative reforms strip them of the power to do so.
The Institutional Rush Ahead of Reform
[ THE VENICE COMMISSION MANDATE ] ──► FUTURE PROHIBITION
• Europe's top advisory body on constitutional law has strictly recommended
terminating the practice of arbitrary upward transfers to higher offices.
[ THE CLOSING OPPORTUNITY ] ──► THE "JAGMA" EFFECT
• Knowing new laws will soon enforce these rules, internal factions are
rushing to transfer preferred personnel while the old rules still apply.
[ THE UNSEEN CASUALTIES ] ──► MERITOCRACY CRUSHED
• Independent, highly qualified prosecutors who refuse to align with either
faction are completely sidelined and ignored in the selection process.
“This session was used to create what used to be called ‘jagma’ (looting/scramble) in the Ottoman Empire. When a city is conquered, the victors have the right to plunder everything, and after three days, imperial laws are established. That is exactly what is happening here before the new law takes effect.”
— Goran Ilić, Public Prosecutor
2. A Clash of Two Factions: Bureaucracy vs. Direct Political Control
According to Ilić, the current prosecutorial system in Serbia has fractured into two primary centers of gravity, completely bypassing objective, merit-based career advancement in favor of political alignment.
The Two Factions Dominating Serbia's Judiciary
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ [ THE INSTITUTIONAL CAMP ] ───────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ • Power structures coalesced around the Supreme Public Prosecutor, │ │
│ seeking to maintain traditional bureaucratic control. │ │
│ │ │
│ [ THE POLITICAL CAMP ] ───────────────────────────────────────────┤ │
│ • Forces aligned directly with the ruling regime's interests, managed │ │
│ and driven through the Ministry of Justice. │ │
│ │ │
│ [ THE SACRIFICED ELEMENT ] ───────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│ • The sole casualty of this compromise is the public interest and the │
│ integrity of the rule of law in Serbia. │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
3. The Return of Ousted Prosecutors to TOK
While Ilić welcomed the VST’s recent decision to return three prosecutors to the Prosecution Office for Organized Crime (TOK), he emphasized that their removal in the first place under the controversial, politically charged “Mrdić Laws” was a severe institutional failure.
| High-Profile Case File | Immediate Procedural Necessity | The Long-Term Outlook |
| The “Nadstrešnica” (Canopy) Case | Reinstated prosecutors must be immediately re-assigned to this specific file, which they pioneered before their abrupt dismissal. | Populating TOK is necessary, but it will not fix systemic corruption. |
| The “Konjuh” Case | The returning legal teams possess deep, non-transferable institutional knowledge critical for prosecuting this complex file. | The foundational systemic flaws plaguing Serbia’s rule of law remain unaddressed. |
Despite the positive step of restoring targeted investigators to politically sensitive dossiers, Ilić cautioned the public against adopting a naive narrative that these returns signify a systematic cure. He concluded by stating that while filling vacant seats at TOK is logistically beneficial, none of the core structural dependencies choking Serbia’s judicial independence will be solved by localized personnel corrections alone.
