Silence is Stronger than Noise

Context of the Tragedy

For an international legal audience, this tragedy requires contextualization. The reconstruction of a public infrastructure facility was carried out under conditions that raise serious concerns regarding transparency, public procurement procedures, effective supervision, and the clarity of documentation and financial flows.

The gap between what the law requires and what has occurred forms the starting point for any meaningful discussion on the rule of law. and repealed in 2023.

During the reconstruction of the Novi Sad railway station, a lex specialis – the Law on Special Procedures for the Implementation of the Project of Construction and Reconstruction of Line Infrastructure Structures of Particular Importance to the Republic of Serbia, adopted in 2020 – was in effect, allowing the State to conclude contracts with private entities, within public-private partnerships, or with foreign states outside standard public procurement procedures and transparency requirements, including without full public disclosure of contractual arrangements. This framework effectively left the executive authority with broad discretion to determine contractual partners and engage service providers without meaningful public oversight, raising significant concerns regarding accountability, the rule of law, and equal access to public resources. In such circumstances, the concentration of decision-making power within the executive branch, coupled with the absence of effective safeguards, risks transforming lawful discretion into an abuse of discretion, undermining the fundamental principles of the rule of law.¹Constitution of the Republic of Serbia – provisions on human rights, freedoms, and university autonomy. Although the law was repealed in 2023 under European Union pressure, certain mechanisms – particularly those concerning the designation of projects of special importance – were subsequently incorporated into the Law on Planning and Construction, meaning that some of these critical features persist within the current legal framework, albeit under a different statutory context.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is not merely the existence of legal norms, but their consistent application, oversight, and accountability. Where transparency, supervision, and legal certainty are absent, law ceases to function as a system and becomes form without substance. The consequences are not abstract – they are tangible and, in this case, tragic.

Student Resistance

Yet, from this silence did not emerge passivity, but resistance. When institutions fail, citizens assume the role that law was meant to fulfill, and in this case, initially, the resistance was fueled by students. Not wishing to live in a state where the rule of law does not exist, students refused to attend classes and blocked access to almost all faculties across Serbia from November 2024-November 2025.

“Students don’t want to live in a state where the rule of law does not exist”

This phenomenon represents a prolonged and continuous struggle for the rule of law in the public sphere.

Defending University Autonomy

In response to the student protests, all of which were peaceful, the government reacted aggressivelyPolice entered the rectorate in Novi Sad, followed by interventions at university faculties, including the Faculty of Philosophy, despite the peaceful nature of the protests. The culmination of this pattern is reflected in the police entry into the rectorate of the University of Belgrade and the search of its premises. For the legal community, this is a test of the boundaries between state power and institutional freedom.

The constitutional framework leaves little room for ambiguity. Serbia’s legal order is based on the separation of powers and guarantees the autonomy of universities as a fundamental principle. Actions that undermine this autonomy simultaneously constitute a breach of domestic law and a deviation from international legal standards, including the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights²European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) – particularly Articles 3, 5, 6, 10, and 11 concerning institutional autonomy and proportionality of state action. concerning institutional autonomy, proportionality, and limits of state interference.

Judicial Reform and Prosecution Challenges

In December 2025, a set of judicial laws was adopted upon the proposal of a single member of parliament, encompassing amendments to multiple statutes and significantly affecting the structure and functioning of the judiciary, especially the prosecution service. Such a legislative approach raises serious concerns regarding institutional balance and prosecutorial independence, particularly in light of standards and opinions developed by international bodies³UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary – emphasizing protection of fundamental rights, impartiality, and judicial independence.

The work of the Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime – crucial for tracing financial flows related to this case – has been further hindered by these changes. Additional concern arises from a reportedly accidental fire that occurred in the very premises where documentation relevant to financial investigations was stored.

Human Rights Violations

Over the past eighteen months, during the period encompassed by these peaceful protests, virtually every human right enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and in the European Convention on Human Rights has been challenged. Students endured beatings, arbitrary arrests, assaults with batons, head injuries, restriction of freedom of assembly, intimidation, excessive use of force, intrusion into peaceful assemblies using police vehicles, and harassment of journalists and observers. In constitutional terms, these incidents affected freedom and safety of the person, freedom of movement, freedom of assembly, freedom of expression, and the right to education. The list of violations is so extensive that it defies comprehensive enumeration. Yet, despite attacks on their physical integrity and dignity, students have remained resolute.

“Their courage exemplifies a commitment to fundamental rights that deserves not only the recognition of Europe, but the attention and respect of the entire international community.”

More than a year later, students have not withdrawn. Prepared to sacrifice years meant for education, personal growth, and intellectual development, they persist in a struggle for what should constitute the basic standard of any democratic society.

International Obligations

Serbia, as a candidate country for membership in the European Union, is obliged to align its legal system with the standards of the rule of law, particularly in the field of judiciary and fundamental rights, as reflected in accession requirements and Chapter 23 benchmarks⁴European Commission, 2025 Rule of Law Report – Country Chapter on Serbia, highlighting concerns over the extensive use of lex specialis frameworks and derogations from public procurement rules in strategic infrastructure projects; see also Venice Commission, Rule of Law Checklist (CDL-AD(2016)007), emphasizing that legal certainty, transparency, and safeguards against arbitrariness are core elements of the rule of law, particularly where executive discretion in public contracting is expanded.

Therefore, clear and principled support is needed – not only from European institutions, but also from international and national bar associations and legal communities. Without such support, and without directing international attention to these developments, this struggle may endure far longer.

Students are not demanding the extraordinary. They are demanding the right to live in a state where the rule of law exists. And when the most educated part of a society must sacrifice its finest years to make that right visible – silence is no longer remembrance. It becomes a call to responsibility.