What it is
The Mrdic laws are the public shorthand for amendments to five judicial laws adopted by Serbia's parliament on January 28, 2026, on a proposal by SNS MP Ugljesa Mrdic. The package covers laws on public prosecution, the High Prosecutorial Council, judges, court and prosecutor territories, and bodies for fighting high-tech crime.
Why it became disputed
The government presented the January amendments as a way to improve judicial efficiency and strengthen prosecutorial staffing. Parts of the professional community, the opposition, and the EU criticized the package as a risk to prosecutorial autonomy and judicial independence, especially because of temporary prosecutor assignments, the position of TOK, and the status of the cybercrime unit.
What the Venice Commission said
On April 24, 2026, the Venice Commission published an urgent opinion and issued seven key recommendations. Its June 16 follow-up opinion clarified the status: Serbia, in the Commission's assessment, had implemented seven of nine recommendations, but two important areas were not fully resolved. The first was the return of prosecutors to the Organized Crime Prosecutor's Office: two of 11 prosecutors whose temporary assignments had been ended early had not been returned. The second was the structural and operational autonomy of the cybercrime unit, where the Commission saw a working group as a positive step but expected analysis and possible legal changes.
What changed after the opinion
On June 17, parliament opened an extraordinary session with 32 agenda items, including amendments to the five judicial laws. On June 18, the High Prosecutorial Council decided to assign Irena Bjelos, Aleksandar Barac, and Boris Majlat to TOK for three years; Bjelos and Barac were due to return from June 19. That addresses part of the problem identified by the Commission, but does not close the whole dispute over temporary prosecutor assignments.
What the government promises
Ana Brnabic said on June 12 that the package had received a positive Venice Commission opinion, should reach parliament the following week, and, in the government's expectation, could soon help open Cluster 3 - the EU negotiation cluster on competitiveness and inclusive growth. She also said the government preserved at least three previously criticized solutions, including assigning prosecutor transfers to VST, reducing the required majority from eight to six votes after 30 days, and moving the split of the third and fourth court/prosecutor offices to March 1.
What Platforma za evropsku Srbiju disputes
On June 21, SSP, SRCE, PSG, and Solidarnost, gathered around Platforma za evropsku Srbiju, told EU institutions that, in their account, the Venice Commission and parliament received different versions of the amendments. They point in particular to transitional provisions: in their version, those provisions could delay formation of the commission for complaints against mandatory instructions and preserve three-year mandates for prosecutors temporarily assigned from lower to higher prosecutor's offices. The Justice Ministry and Minister Nenad Vujic deny this and say the parliamentary text differs only because it is in Serbian.
Current status
As of June 22, 2026, the package is in a parliamentary and political phase: the government says it has aligned the laws with the Venice Commission and expects Cluster 3, while opposition parties dispute whether the European advisory body saw the same text as parliament. The TOK issue was partly moved by VST's June 18 decision, but the cybercrime unit's status and the legal effect of transitional provisions remain checkable open points.
Why it matters
For readers, this is not only a dispute over legal drafting. Rules on appointing and assigning prosecutors affect who handles sensitive cases, including organized crime, corruption, and matters of major public interest. For Serbia, it is also part of EU talks: if Brussels sees rule-of-law objections as closed, Cluster 3 could move after a pause since December 2021; if the text dispute is confirmed, it becomes a new reason to distrust the process.
Next open question
Watch the final text parliament adopts, how it treats transitional provisions, further steps on the cybercrime unit's autonomy, and the EU institutions' response to the Platforma za evropsku Srbiju letter.