Serbia and EU accession

This story tracks Serbia's EU talks, rule-of-law requirements, judicial reforms, media issues, and foreign-policy conditions. In June 2026, the key current episode concerns amendments to five judicial laws, Venice Commission opinions, and expectations around opening Cluster 3.

• Serbia has not opened new EU accession negotiation chapters since December 2021.
• In January 2026, parliament adopted amendments to five judicial laws on MP Ugljesa Mrdic's proposal, drawing criticism from parts of the professional community and the EU over prosecutorial autonomy and judicial independence.
• On April 24, the Venice Commission published an urgent opinion identifying shortcomings and seven key recommendations for removing them.
• On May 18, the Justice Ministry sent improved working drafts of the amendments to parliament for transmission to Venice Commission rapporteurs.
• On June 12, Ana Brnabic said the Venice Commission had given a positive opinion, that the package would go to parliament next week, and that the government expects Cluster 3 to open soon.
• The follow-up opinion published on June 16 clarified the status: seven of nine recommendations were implemented, but the return of two of 11 organized-crime prosecutors and the autonomy of the cybercrime unit remain unresolved.
• On June 17, Serbia's parliament opened an extraordinary session with amendments to five judicial laws on the agenda, moving the Venice Commission recommendations dispute from expert review into parliamentary procedure.
• On the evening of June 17, N1 and Danas reported that the High Prosecutorial Council scheduled a June 18 extraordinary session with temporary assignment of public prosecutors to TOK among the proposed agenda items; this addresses one unresolved Venice Commission remark.
• On June 18, VST decided to assign Irena Bjelos, Aleksandar Barac, and Boris Majlat to TOK for three years; Bjelos and Barac return from June 19, while Danas separately carried the Judicial Authority Union's criticism that temporary assignment of prosecutors as a mechanism is not in line with European standards.
• On June 21, SSP, SRCE, PSG, and Solidarnost told EU institutions that, according to them, the Venice Commission and parliament received different texts of the judicial-law amendments; the Justice Ministry denies this and says the parliamentary version differs only because it is in Serbian.