A commission established by Serbia’s Supreme Public Prosecution Office published a report on Tuesday accusing the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade of committing irregularities in seven high-profile cases. The investigation, formed on October 27 two days after parliamentary elections where the opposition Student List defeated the ruling Serbian Progressive Party, found that the office had violated the law through unlawful searches and seizures. The report specifically targets the handling of protests linked to an alleged sonic weapon incident, attacks on students, and a police raid on the university rectorate building.
The Sonic Weapon Investigation
The central case involves a March 2025 protest where approximately 300,000 people gathered in Belgrade. During a 15-minute silence honoring victims of the 2024 Novi Sad railway station disaster, an unexpected noise triggered a brief stampede. Protesters suspected a long-range acoustic weapon was used, leading the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office to open a case. However, the prosecution closed the matter in September 2025, claiming no grounds for criminal proceedings existed. The commission criticized this decision, stating the office did less to investigate the incident and more to "formalise a decision, made in advance, that no sound cannon had been used."
The report details how prosecutors treated government claims that no acoustic weapon was deployed as indisputable facts, disregarding material evidence that directly contradicted them. In several instances, the political affiliations of video recording authors were used as an argument against the credibility of their claims. Furthermore, the office requested the Security Intelligence Agency check 154 citizens who gave statements about the alleged use of a sound cannon in June 2026. This approach clearly prioritized protecting state interests over investigating potential crimes against protesters.
Institutional Backlash and Retaliation
The commission concluded that Nenad Stefanovic, head of the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office, "instrumentalised certain public prosecutors in pursuit of illegitimate objectives, and effectively established a parallel prosecutorial system." It identified bias in case handling and the abuse of hierarchical powers to restrict the rights of injured parties. The report has been forwarded to the Prosecutor’s Office for Organised Crime to start criminal proceedings.
Stefanovic rejected the findings as unfounded, questioning whether the report was intended to examine legality or merely used to settle scores with the Chief Public Prosecutor. On Tuesday, he filed a criminal complaint against Goran Ilic, the public prosecutor chairing the commission. He accused Ilic of abuse of office and obstruction of justice, alleging that Ilic interfered with his duties and advised him to resign. The Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office remains defiant despite the formal accusation of establishing a parallel system.
