Legal experts and former senior judicial officials have warned that prosecuting crimes committed against the judiciary has become a critical condition for preserving the rule of law and preventing the collapse of prosecutorial independence in Serbia.
According to an analysis published in the 100th issue of Tužilačka nužna odbrana, journalist Milan Radonjić highlights growing concerns that interference by the executive branch threatens both the functioning of the prosecution system and broader democratic governance.
Rare Prosecutions Undermine Judicial Protection
The article argues that executive authorities continue to interfere in investigations, intimidate prosecutors and judges, and pressure witnesses largely because such actions are rarely prosecuted or punished.
Criminal offenses against the judiciary in Serbia include:
- Obstruction of evidence gathering
- Interference with judicial proceedings
- Threats or intimidation directed at prosecutors, judges, or witnesses
- Unauthorized disclosure of confidential investigative information
Statistics from the national statistical office show that in 2024, 194 indictments related to crimes against the judiciary resulted in 157 convictions, most involving minor offenses such as false reporting or false testimony. However, serious crimes like obstruction of justice resulted in only eight convictions, raising concerns about accountability.
By comparison, penalties for obstruction of justice in the United States can reach 20 years in prison, while similar offenses in the United Kingdom can carry life sentences.
Former Supreme Court President Warns of Institutional Collapse
Vida Petrović Škero, former President of Serbia’s Supreme Court, warned that public attacks and political pressure against prosecutors represent a direct threat to constitutional order.
She stressed that the withdrawal of police support from specialized prosecutorial task forces severely weakens investigations.
“If prosecutors do not have police support, the prosecution system effectively ceases to exist,” Petrović Škero said.
She also criticized inflammatory rhetoric from political leaders, warning that labeling prosecutors as criminal organizations undermines trust in the judiciary and damages institutional stability.
Judiciary Must Defend Itself, Experts Say
Legal scholar Vesna Rakić Vodinelić described prosecuting crimes against the judiciary as a form of “necessary self-defense” for the legal system.
She warned that failure to respond to political interference could result in the de facto dismantling of judicial independence. Vodinelić also cited cases involving alleged police refusal to cooperate with investigations and failure to question suspects or witnesses, arguing that such actions may themselves constitute criminal offenses.
Criticism of Public Statements by Political Leadership
The article notes that President Aleksandar Vučić previously described the Organized Crime Prosecutor’s Office as a “criminal gang,” a statement that some legal experts argue could itself warrant prosecutorial review.
Vodinelić suggested that even symbolic legal steps, such as summoning political figures for questioning, could reinforce the principle that no individual is above the law.
Growing International Pressure
Observers believe that the European Commission is increasingly monitoring governance standards in Serbia, potentially raising expectations for stronger enforcement of judicial independence.
However, analysts emphasize that meaningful reform ultimately depends on the courage and consistency of Serbia’s prosecutorial institutions, including specialized anti-corruption and organized crime bodies.
A Turning Point for Judicial Independence
Experts conclude that Serbia may be approaching a decisive moment, warning that failure to prosecute systemic interference could permanently weaken the rule of law. At the same time, effective legal action against such offenses could serve as a catalyst for broader democratic reforms.
