Issue for June 18, 2026

Serbia last opened new EU negotiation chapters in December 2021; that fact again became part of the dispute around Cluster 3.

Parliament adopted amendments to five judicial laws on MP Ugljesa Mrdic's proposal; professional groups and the EU later criticized them as a risk to prosecutorial autonomy and judicial independence.

The Venice Commission published an urgent opinion on the January amendments and issued seven key recommendations to address the shortcomings.

The Justice Ministry sent improved working drafts of the judicial-law amendments to parliament for transmission to Venice Commission rapporteurs.

Ana Brnabic said the Venice Commission gave a positive opinion on the package, that the amendments would go to parliament next week, and that she expects Cluster 3 to open soon.

The Venice Commission published its follow-up opinion: Serbia implemented seven of nine recommendations, but two key areas - the return of two organized-crime prosecutors and autonomy for the cybercrime unit - are not fully implemented.

Parliament put amendments to five judicial laws on an extraordinary session agenda, including laws on public prosecution, judges, the High Prosecutorial Council, court and prosecutor territories, and bodies for fighting high-tech crime.

VST decided to assign Irena Bjelos, Aleksandar Barac, and Boris Majlat to TOK for three years; the decision for Bjelos and Barac passed with nine votes in favor and one abstention, while Majlat's passed with eight in favor, one against, and one abstention.

Platforma za evropsku Srbiju informed EU institutions of allegedly different judicial-law texts for the Venice Commission and parliament; the Justice Ministry rejected the claims of differences.

At the extraordinary session on 32 agenda items, parliament debated 37 amendments to the key judicial laws in the Mrdic package. N1 reports that opposition amendments were rejected; the sitting ended at about 18:00 and is scheduled to continue on June 24 at 10:00.

Parliament finished detailed debate on all 32 items of the extraordinary session; voting, including on the judicial-law package, is scheduled for June 25 at 10:00.

Parliament adopted a package of five judicial laws, and the government formed a negotiating team for Serbia's inclusion in the EU 'Roam Like at Home' regime.

Dubravka Valić Nedeljković said four elected REM Council members whose resignations were not verified by parliament are ready to return only with guarantees: the ninth member should be chosen after national-council elections, and Ištvan Bodžoni should not be on the candidate harmonization list.

RFE/RL/N1/Danas reported that the Netherlands officially opposes opening Cluster 3 with Serbia, while diplomatic sources say at least five EU states oppose it, including three Baltic states and Sweden.

Four independent REM Council members said they decided to take up work after parliament adopted an authentic interpretation of the Electronic Media Law; their earlier resignation statements were interpreted as having no independent legal effect because they had not taken office.

The European Parliament's official X account posted its position on the rule of law, democratic standards, free and fair elections, and normalization of relations with Kosovo. The post was not a new negotiating decision.

European Parliament rapporteur Tonino Picula told N1 that the preparation, conduct, and aftermath of future elections would be an important criterion in assessing Brussels' relations with Belgrade. He also judged opening Cluster 3 unlikely; this is his assessment, not a new EU decision.

The European Commission published Serbia's chapter in its annual Rule of Law Report. It cites political pressure on courts and prosecutors, problems with implementing the anti-corruption plan, REM, and journalist safety; it is not a decision to open a negotiation cluster.

According to N1, Danas, Kurir, and Novosti, a shooting incident took place at the Steak and Wine Bar on Autokomanda. The prosecution later said it suspected that some police officers had failed to carry out the necessary steps after the event.

The Senjak branch intensified through reporting on the killing of Aleksandar Nesovic and complaints of police violence during questioning. N1 stressed that prosecutors were not releasing details, citing the protection of the pre-investigation phase.

All four outlets wrote about the arrest of the commander and officers of Interventna jedinica 92. N1 and Danas stressed institutional failure and procedural violations, Kurir personalized the case through the figure of the commander, and Novosti relayed the official prosecutorial position.

N1 reported that the commander of Interventna jedinica 92 and a team leader were placed in custody, and later detailed the questioning of Mitar J., Jugoslav S., Nenad S., and Darko Z. After the questioning, the Higher Prosecutor's Office sought custody for Jugoslav S., Nenad S., and Darko Z., house arrest for Mitar J., while Slavica Radovanovic called MUP's work in the Senjak branch sloppy and amateurish.

Novosti reported that the preliminary-proceedings judge of the Higher Court in Belgrade extended custody for up to 30 days for Veselin Milic, Sasa Vukovic, Mario S., Danka V., Nenad L., Dejan S., and Jasna Z. in the Aleksandar Nesovic Baja murder case.

021 carried the Higher Prosecutor's Office explanation for dismissing part of the complaint against Veselin Milic: subsequent evidence and testimony did not confirm a call inviting Aleksandar Nesovic to come without security, Milic's presence in the restaurant at the time of the killing, or his removal of traces.

Prosecutors expanded the investigation into Aleksandar Nesovic's killing: Sasa V. and Mario S. are suspected of aggravated murder as co-perpetrators, Danka V. of assisting aggravated murder, and evidentiary actions were ordered against Veselin M., Nenad L., Vuk S., Petar U., Dejan S., Jasna Z., Milos J., and Dusan V.

Sasa Vukovic Boske, whom prosecutors describe as the direct perpetrator in Aleksandar Nesovic's killing, was questioned at his own request; lawyer Ivan Simic said the questioning continues on June 17.

Novosti reported that Vukovic Boske spent two days giving his defense before three Higher Prosecutor's Office prosecutors over suspicions in Aleksandar Nesovic Baja's killing at restaurant "27" in Senjak.

After the defense alleged threats to Veselin Milic in Belgrade district jail, VJT ordered the Second Basic Prosecutor's Office to identify unknown persons, while the prison administration said it strictly follows safety procedures for all detainees.

The Higher Court in Belgrade lifted Veselin Milic's custody, moving him to defense from freedom on the branch alleging failure to report Aleksandar Nesovic's killing at restaurant "27" in Senjak. In comments to N1, lawyers Vladimir Terzic and Bozo Prelevic tie that decision to exhausted evidentiary steps and to an investigation they say is already too compromised.

A student opened fire at Belgrade's Vladislav Ribnikar school. Nine pupils and a security guard were killed, others were wounded, and in the first days the media focused on the planning of the attack, the father's weapons, and the fact that the shooter was too young for adult criminal liability.

After the tragedy, Serbia declared mourning, debated gun control and school safety measures, and then saw the start of the Serbia Against Violence protests, which directed demands at the state, regulators, and media.

The case split into several branches: criminal charges against the parents and related figures, civil suits by families, and questions of responsibility for the school and the state. That means each new article has to be read in the context of which branch of the process it actually concerns.

N1 recorded the prosecution's position on the sentences for Vladimir Kecmanovic and the mother, Danas updated the story through the words of a murdered girl's mother, and Kurir and Novosti put details of the final phase into their headlines. The case thus moved into waiting for the verdict.

Kurir separately reported that the verdict in the Ribnikar case is scheduled for June 18. That date becomes the next point that families, the court, and the media will watch.

The Higher Court in Belgrade sentenced Vladimir Kecmanovic to 14 years and 6 months and Miljana Kecmanovic to 2 years and 11 months in the repeated trial; the first-instance verdict can be appealed.