Retired Supreme Court judge and member of Serbia’s Inquiry Commission Radmila Dragičević Dičić has sharply criticized proposed amendments to the country’s judicial laws, warning that they could have far-reaching consequences for the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.
Speaking to N1, Dragičević Dičić described the proposed legislation, including the Law on the Judicial Academy, as “legal violence” against the judiciary.
“If these laws are adopted, they will have far-reaching negative consequences for Serbian society. This is not only a matter concerning the judiciary, and we expect some form of resistance to emerge,” she said.
She argued that most judges, legal professionals and professional associations that are not government-aligned organizations oppose the proposals, accusing the authorities of creating the appearance of public consultation while limiting genuine participation.
Judicial Academy as a potential political filter
Dragičević Dičić described the proposed Law on the Judicial Academy as unconstitutional and unnecessary.
She particularly objected to provisions that would make the Judicial Academy the main or exclusive entry point into the judiciary, arguing that this could undermine the constitutional role of the High Judicial Council and High Prosecutorial Council in selecting judges and prosecutors.
According to her, candidates would effectively have to pass through a single institutional channel before becoming eligible for judicial and prosecutorial positions.
“This is the political filter,” she said, questioning what role the judicial and prosecutorial councils would ultimately have if they were required to select candidates based primarily on assessments made by the Judicial Academy.
She also questioned the Academy’s capacity and quality, arguing that it does not have the resources to train the number of judges and prosecutors that Serbia needs.
“We are talking about the future of the judiciary and future generations that could be damaged by this law,” she said.
The Society of Judges of Serbia has also called for the withdrawal of the proposed amendments to the laws on judges, public prosecution and the Judicial Academy, warning that making the Academy the sole entry point into the judiciary could undermine constitutional safeguards and reintroduce political influence over judicial appointments.
Concerns over the Novi Sad railway canopy investigation
Dragičević Dičić also addressed investigations surrounding the collapse of the railway station canopy in Novi Sad.
She said there were indications of possible obstruction of justice in the investigation conducted by the Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime into alleged corruption related to the railway construction project.
She pointed to allegations that police had failed to provide requested documentation and had not acted on certain prosecutorial orders, arguing that such developments could interfere with investigations.
She also called for a written record of such actions in order to protect the integrity and transparency of the proceedings.
According to Dragičević Dičić, there is no reason why the Novi Sad trial concerning the canopy collapse should not be open to the public.
Attacks against prosecutors and judges
Addressing cases involving the burning of a prosecutor’s vehicle in Valjevo and an attack targeting a prosecutor in Subotica, she said the state must respond in a way that demonstrates its commitment to protecting the constitutional order, separation of powers, courts and prosecutors.
She also criticized the growing public attacks against judges and prosecutors, saying they are increasingly targeted not only by tabloids but also by politicians and senior state officials.
“Images of judges, their phone numbers and names are published, and they are attacked through tabloid media,” she said, arguing that this creates an atmosphere of violence and a perception of impunity.
“If the state allows their cars to be set on fire, then that state is entering dangerous waters,” Dragičević Dičić warned.
The proposed judicial reforms were submitted to Serbia’s National Assembly on July 17, with public hearings subsequently held in Kragujevac, Niš, Novi Sad and Belgrade.
