Serbia’s intelligence agency is facing internal turmoil as director Vladimir Orlić launches an extensive purge of officials and employees following the publication of documents allegedly confirming that the agency had been spying on the Radar newsroom.
The Serbian Security Intelligence Agency (BIA) has been thrown into a major internal crisis following the publication of documents by the investigative outlet Radar that reportedly provide evidence of surveillance targeting its journalists.
After initially issuing a brief denial, the agency launched an internal investigation, summoning around ten senior officials and employees for questioning at its Fifth Directorate. The interrogations, some of which reportedly included polygraph examinations, continued throughout the first week of November.
The investigation was followed by several dismissals and personnel changes, including the removal of Olivera Munjić, head of BIA director Vladimir Orlić’s cabinet.
According to Radar, Ivan Ribać, a former special adviser to the BIA director, former Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) MP and former deputy head of customs, has been appointed as her replacement.
Two secretaries from Orlić’s cabinet were also reportedly subjected to polygraph examinations.
Meanwhile, Miloš Simić was abruptly dismissed as head of BIA’s First Directorate, the agency’s largest operational department, and was issued a termination of employment.
The developments followed a reportedly tense conversation between Simić and Dragan Živaljević, head of BIA’s Security Directorate. According to unofficial information obtained by Radar, Simić refused an order to appear for questioning after being summoned early in the morning.
His subordinates in the First Directorate reportedly followed his example, refusing to cooperate with the investigation. Radar describes the situation as an unprecedented breakdown of the agency’s chain of command.
Controversial Appointments Within the Intelligence Agency
The personnel changes have also raised questions about the qualifications of some newly appointed senior officials.
According to Radar, Branko Gligorijević, a former member of the Special Anti-Terrorist Unit (SAJ) and Orlić’s former driver, was appointed head of the Sixth Directorate, responsible for security.
Miroslav Radivojević, who previously worked as a caretaker at the Serbian Parliament, was appointed head of the Eleventh Directorate, responsible for logistics.
Radar argues that these appointments further undermine the credibility of BIA’s initial denial regarding the surveillance allegations.
The agency’s statement had warned that individuals involved in what it described as destructive anti-state activities could expect to remain subjects of BIA investigations and official reporting to state institutions.
The publication questioned whether the warning represented an indication that its journalists remained under surveillance.
Polygraph Tests and Pressure on BIA Employees
The interrogations intensified towards the end of the first week of November, particularly targeting employees of the Operational Directorate.
Radar had previously reported that its head, Nikola Vasiljević, had privately criticised government demands to monitor student organisations instead of focusing on criminals and terrorists.
The questioning was conducted by employees of the Fifth Directorate, which is responsible for counterintelligence protection within BIA and state institutions.
According to a source cited by Radar, the interrogations began on November 5. Employees responsible for listening to intercepted communications and preparing transcripts were reportedly sent home to prevent them from witnessing their colleagues being summoned for questioning.
These employees, known as audio reviewers, reportedly include several experienced agency officials who had previously been transferred to the position against their wishes.
Radar also cited cases in which employees had successfully challenged allegedly unlawful transfers in court. However, some court rulings ordering their reinstatement were reportedly ignored by agency management.
One employee received an official decision restoring him to his previous position on October 26, the day after Serbia’s parliamentary elections, despite the court having issued its ruling almost three months earlier.
The publication suggests that the election results may have prompted some BIA officials to reconsider their refusal to comply with court decisions.
Fifth Directorate Used to Investigate Its Own Colleagues
Radar notes that the Fifth Directorate was once considered one of BIA’s most prestigious departments, with senior operational officers traditionally selected after at least a decade of service and outstanding professional performance.
However, the publication argues that over the past decade, the department increasingly became a destination for politically loyal personnel.
Among those associated with this transformation was Marko Kričak, described by Radar as an important regime loyalist.
The department was previously headed by Goran Colić, who currently leads the Interior Ministry’s technical directorate responsible for communications interception.
Radar also recalls Colić’s earlier operational activities, including surveillance of businessman Darko Šarić and former Serbian Radical Party leader Vojislav Šešelj.
The publication further highlights his involvement in the management of Partizan football club during a period when supporters’ groups came under the influence of Veljko Belivuk’s network.
BIA Threatens Employees With Dismissal and Criminal Charges
On November 4, the Fifth Directorate reportedly circulated an internal warning to all regional BIA centres, stating that employees who disclosed information about the agency’s operational activities could face dismissal and criminal prosecution.
Radar links the warning to the broader political atmosphere in Serbia, arguing that pressure on intelligence officials reflects the disciplinary methods employed within the ruling SNS.
The publication also recalls earlier tensions between former Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić and BIA officials over the agency’s handling of the student movement, particularly in the days leading up to the March 15, 2025 protests.
According to Radar, Orlić is now attempting to find individuals to blame for the agency’s internal failures, directing his anger towards employees he considers insufficiently loyal.
Documents Suggest Surveillance Was Ordered by BIA Director
One of the most significant aspects of the controversy concerns the legal basis for the surveillance of Radar journalists.
The documents published by the newsroom reportedly indicate that monitoring of journalists’ communications, private and professional premises, and vehicles was authorised under the Law on the Security Intelligence Agency rather than the Criminal Procedure Code.
Radar argues that this suggests the surveillance measures were ordered directly by the BIA director.
The measures reportedly included telephone interception, audio surveillance of workplace premises and vehicles, as well as covert physical monitoring.
Under Serbia’s current BIA legislation, the agency director has considerable discretion to authorise extensive surveillance measures. However, Radar questions the grounds on which the measures were initially approved and subsequently extended through judicial procedures.
The publication also stresses that information obtained through this particular legal framework cannot be used as evidence in criminal proceedings.
It further questions why surveillance was maintained for an extended period under suspicions of espionage, arguing that such allegations require concrete evidence rather than assumptions.
Radar Calls for Fundamental Reconstruction of BIA
The investigation has reignited broader concerns about the use of secret surveillance in Serbia, particularly during periods of political unrest and mass protests.
Radar claims that the number of individuals subjected to secret surveillance increased significantly during the One of Five Million protest movement, exceeding 6,000 according to sources cited by the publication. It says the trend continued as the student movement gained momentum.
The outlet also raises concerns about cases in which individuals previously subjected to surveillance were subsequently murdered, arguing that those responsible for authorising or conducting inadequate monitoring have frequently faced no consequences.
Concluding its investigation, Radar argues that the latest developments represent the final chapter of BIA in its current institutional form.
The publication maintains that the agency cannot continue operating under its existing legal and organisational framework and calls for a comprehensive restructuring, including its dissolution and reconstruction on entirely new foundations.
The allegations and internal developments described in the report have not been independently verified.
