Three Prosecutors Reinstated to Serbia’s Organized Crime Office after Venice Commission Recommendation

Serbia’s High Council of Prosecutors has reinstated three prosecutors to the Prosecutor's Office for Organized Crime (Tužilaštvo za organizovani kriminal, TOK), a move officials say implements another key recommendation made by the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission. At an extraordinary session on Thursday the council decided that Irena Bjeloš of the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade, Aleksandar Barac of the Appellate Public Prosecutor’s Office in Novi Sad and Boris Majlat of the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Šabac will return to TOK for fixed three-year terms.

The three had been removed from their positions earlier under a controversial set of judicial amendments widely referred to as the "Mrdićevih" laws. Their dismissal became a focal point of criticism from European institutions and domestic legal observers, who warned that the legislative changes risked politicizing prosecutorial appointments and undermining the independence of the judiciary.

The prosecutors reinstated to TOK have worked on high-profile and sensitive cases. Among them are inquiries into possible corruption linked to the collapse of the canopy at the Novi Sad railway station that killed 16 people, and investigations related to the seizure of five tonnes of marijuana in a village near Kruševac in central Serbia. Their return removes a point of contention highlighted by European bodies as indicative of the need for personnel and structural reforms within Serbia’s prosecutorial system.

The Venice Commission’s involvement followed criticism from the European Commission (EC), which in late January called for urgent revisions to the judicial law changes that had been adopted by Serbia’s parliament. The EC characterized the earlier amendments as a significant step backwards in Serbia’s rule-of-law trajectory and warned that they could jeopardize funding commitments tied to European growth plans. In response to those concerns, the Venice Commission released recommendations at the end of April aimed at remedying deficiencies in the reworked legal framework.

On June 16 the Venice Commission said Serbian authorities had implemented a substantial portion of its key recommendations, but noted that two of nine suggestions had not been fully enacted — notably those concerning personnel decisions at TOK and the reinstatement of prosecutors removed under the disputed laws. The High Council’s Thursday decision to return Bjeloš, Barac and Majlat addresses that specific shortfall, bringing Serbia closer to full compliance with the Venice Commission’s guidance.

Serbia has begun to implement other changes recommended by the Venice Commission since the advisory body issued its guidance. Domestic legal experts and European officials have treated the reinstatements as a tangible sign that Belgrade is attempting to respond to international scrutiny, though some observers say broader reforms are needed to fully restore confidence in prosecutorial independence and the impartiality of the judiciary.

The reinstatement decision has wider implications for Serbia’s relations with the European Union. Brussels has repeatedly tied progress on rule-of-law reforms to Serbia’s EU integration prospects and to access to financial instruments linked to reforms and growth. Restoring prosecutors removed after the parliamentary changes could help ease some diplomatic pressure, but EU institutions will likely continue to monitor implementation of remaining recommendations closely.

For now, the return of the three prosecutors resolves one of the more visible disputes between Serbian authorities and European advisers. Whether the reinstatements will translate into durable institutional change and greater judicial independence remains subject to follow-up reforms and independent oversight, both from domestic institutions and international bodies engaged in monitoring Serbia’s compliance with European legal norms.