Wikipedia

Mrdić's Laws

Mrdić's Laws (Serbian: Мрдићеви закони, romanized: Mrdićevi zakoni) are a collection of amendments to judicial laws in Serbia. They are named after its sponsor Uglješa Mrdić, a member of the National Assembly of Serbia affiliated with the Serbian Progressive Party. Before the laws were submitted, the Public Prosecutor's Office for Organised Crime (TOK) launched investigations into several former ministers of the government of Serbia. Mrdić's Laws target the Law on the High Council of Prosecutions, Law on Seats and Areas of Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices, Law on the Organisation and Competencies of State Authorities to Fight High-Tech Crime, Law on Public Prosecutions, and Law on Judges. Most prominent changes to the laws include the reorganisation of the TOK and Prosecutor's Office for High-Tech Crime under the Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade, which is headed by Nenad Stefanović, an Aleksandar Vučić loyalist, and the creation of the Fourth Basic Court in Belgrade.

Mrdić's Laws
National Assembly of Serbia
  • (1) Law on Amendments to the Law on the High Council of Prosecutions
    (2) Law on Amendments to the Law on Seats and Areas of Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices
    (3) Law on Amendments to the Law on the Organisation and Competencies of State Authorities to Fight Hight-Tech Crime
    (4) Law on Amendments to the Law on Public Prosecutions
    (5) Law on Amendments to the Law on Judges
Passed byNational Assembly of Serbia
Passed28 January 2026
Enacted9 February 2026
Signed byAleksandar Vučić
Signed30 January 2026
Introduced byUglješa Mrdić
Introduced22 December 2025

Submitted to the National Assembly on 22 December 2025, the laws were adopted on 28 January 2026 by a majority of MPs. Vučić signed the laws on 30 January and they went into effect on 9 February. Those supportive of the changes say that the judiciary's efficiency would be increased and improved. Mrdić's Laws received criticism from the TOK, High Council of the Judiciary, High Council of the Prosecutor's Office, Republic Prosecutor's Office, European Union, political opposition, non-governmental organisations, and judicial experts. Critics said that the laws do not meet international standards, that they abandon the principles of the European Union and the process of the accession of Serbia to the European Union, or that the judiciary would be put under the control of the government. Government officials have disputed some of these claims. Lack of public discussion regarding the proposals was also criticised. In response to this, the government seeked an opinion from the Venice Commission. It published some proposals in April and discussed the changes in detail in June.

Background

edit

Uglješa Mrdić is a member of the National Assembly of Serbia affiliated with the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS). He is the president of the Judiciary Committee in the National Assembly.[1] On 31 October 2025, he began a hunger strike in front of the National Assembly, demanding that Nebojša Bojović and Milutin Milošević, officials formerly associated with the Serbian Railways Infrastructure company, be jailed. He also said that Zagorka Dolovac, the Supreme Public Prosecutor, was allegedly defending them and that a colour revolution was underway.[1][2] Aleksandar Vučić, the president of Serbia, demanded him to end the hunger strike on 8 November.[3] Mrdić ended the hunger strike on 10 November.[4]

After the hunger strike, Mrdić continued to criticise the Serbian judiciary,[5] alleging that the Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office did not work "in favour of Serbian interests".[6] He sued several prosecutors, including Dolovac, and called for her removal. He also said that he would introduce several amendments to judicial laws in the National Assembly, stating that "we must have a judiciary and prosecutor's office that works in the interest of the state" (moramo imati sudstvo i tužilaštvo koje radi u interesu države). Mrdić's suggestions received support from Nenad Vujić, the minister of justice, and professor Vladan Petrov [sr], while the Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office objected the proposals.[7][8]

The Public Prosecutor's Office for Organised Crime (TOK) had previously launched an investigation about the Novi Sad railway station canopy collapse and Trump Tower Belgrade (General Staff Building) in 2024 and 2025, respectively.[9] In the aftermath of the canopy collapse, the TOK indicted former ministers Tomislav Momirović and Goran Vesić.[10] The government had introduced a lex specialis regarding the General Staff Building, which removed the building's status as a cultural property, and Jared Kushner's company was supposed to build Trump Tower Belgrade on the building's property.[11] However, on 15 December 2025, the TOK filed an indictment against minister Nikola Selaković, stating that he abused his public position and that he falsified documents related to the lex specialis.[12] Selaković denied the accusations, saying that the General Staff Building never had the status as a cultural property.[13] In response to the indictment, Kushner's company announced that it abandoned the Trump Tower Belgrade project.[14]

Content

edit
Uglješa Mrdić, the proposer of the changes

Mrdić's proposed amendments to the Law on the High Council of Prosecutions, Law on Seats and Areas of Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices, Law on the Organisation and Competencies of State Authorities to Fight High-Tech Crime, Law on Public Prosecutions, and Law on Judges.[9] Mrdić's proposals would put the TOK and Public Prosecutor's Office for War Crimes subordinate to the Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade, which is headed by Nenad Stefanović, and create the Fourth Basic Court in Belgrade that would be in charge of cases related to Expo 2027.[8][15]

As reported by Tanjug, the amendments to the Law on Seats and Areas of Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices envision the creation of the Fourt Basic Court in Belgrade.[16]

Changes to the Law on Public Prosecutions include the return of the institution of referral of public prosecutors from lower to higher public prosecutions, while the Supreme Public Prosecutor's right to decide on the referral would be deprived and instead the High Council of Prosecutions would be in charge of that. Additionally, a public prosecutor may be referred to another public prosecution of any level for a maximum of three years. The amendment also states that Supreme Public Prosecutor would be elected every six years. Their right of dicretionary authority to decided who will be the head of the Special Department for the fight against high-tech crime would also be stripped.[16]

Regarding the Law on Judges, there is only a single amendment, regarding the re-election of court presidents for another five-year terms.[16]

Vote

edit

Mrdić submitted the proposals to the National Assembly on 22 December 2025.[16] An amendment to Mrdić's proposals to the Law on Public Prosecutions was submitted by Olja Petrović, also a member of the SNS, on 13 January 2026.[17] Mrdić's proposals came to be known as Mrdić's Laws in the media.[18][19] The journalist Vuk Jeremić of Insajder reported that some part of the public thought that the proposals would be withdrawn from the procedure due to its negative reception. However, on 28 January, the National Assembly voted in favour of the proposals.[20] The proposals were voted under "urgent procedure" (hitna procedura) and without public discussion.[21] A majority of MPs voted in favour of laws. All of the amendments proposed by opposition parliamentary groups were rejected.[22] Vučić signed Mrdić's Laws two days later.[23] They went into effect on 9 February.[24]

Law on Amendments to the
Law on the High Council of Prosecutions
Ballot → 28 January 2026
Required majority → 126 out of 250
Yes
138 / 250
No
36 / 250
Abstentions
0 / 250
Absentees
76 / 250
Source: Otvoreni Parlament[25]
Law on Amendments to the
Law on Seats and Areas of Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices
Ballot → 28 January 2026
Required majority → 126 out of 250
Yes
136 / 250
No
32 / 250
Abstentions
0 / 250
Absentees
77 / 250
Source: Otvoreni Parlament[26]
Law on Amendments to the
Law on the Organisation and Competenceies of
State Authorities to Fight High-Tech Crime
Ballot → 28 January 2026
Required majority → 126 out of 250
Yes
138 / 250
No
36 / 250
Abstentions
0 / 250
Absentees
74 / 250
Source: Otvoreni Parlament[27]
Law on Amendments to the
Law on Public Prosecutions
Ballot → 28 January 2026
Required majority → 126 out of 250
Yes
138 / 250
No
38 / 250
Abstentions
0 / 250
Absentees
73 / 250
Source: Otvoreni Parlament[28]
Law on Amendments to the
Law on Judges
Ballot → 28 January 2026
Required majority → 126 out of 250
Yes
138 / 250
No
37 / 250
Abstentions
0 / 250
Absentees
73 / 250
Source: Otvoreni Parlament[29]

Analysis

edit

Mrdić said that his proposals would improve the independent status of the judiciary.[19] The journalist Vuk Cvijić of the news magazine Radar noted that the changes to the Law on Public Prosecutions would mean that most important investigations done by the TOK would stop once the three-year term of prosecutors expires. He put the Jovanjica case, Darko Šarić case, and the Balkan Cartel case as examples of such investigations.[17] The proposals would also mean that chief prosecutors and court presidents could operate under acting status. According to the TOK, Petrović's amendment would mean that cases related to organised crime and corruption could be questioned considering that most prosecutors under the TOK came from other prosecutor's offices. Jeremić also reported that the reorganisation of the Prosecutor's Office for High-Tech Crime under the Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade could increase the number of criminal proceedings related to social media comments.[20] The N1 television has reported that this is due to Nenad Stefanović's (the president of the Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade) loyalist status towards Vučić.[24]

Reactions

edit

Support

edit
Aleksandar Vučić, the president of Serbia, expressed his support for the changes

Those supportive of Mrdić's Laws say that the efficiency of the judiciary would be increased and improved.[19] Mrdić admitted that he proposed the changes due to the prosecution of SNS members.[30] Milenko Jovanov, the president of the SNS parliamentary group, voiced his support for the proposals.[a] Vučić has also expressed his support for the changes, but has also criticised the SNS and Vujić for the lack of public discussion about the proposals. Elvira Kovács, a vice-president of the National Assembly of Serbia, stated that Mrdić's Laws would not go out of European Union's legal bounds.[31] The Judiciary Committee in the National Assembly also expressed their support for the changes.[32] Petrov, the president of the Constitutional Court, praised Mrdić's character,[33] but only had concerns about Mrdić not taking a look for opinions from the High Council of the Judiciary and the High Council of the Prosecutor's Office.[34] Nemanja Starović, the minister for european integration, says that with the adoption of the changes, Serbia did not end its process of the accession to the European Union.[35]

Opposition

edit

Experts

edit

The TOK, High Council of the Judiciary, High Council of the Prosecutor's Office, Republic Prosecutor's Office, Association of Prosecutors of Serbia, and the Association of Judges of Serbia expressed their opposition to the changes.[31] The Centre for Judicial Research (CEPRIS) also voiced opposition to the amendments, saying that they would strengthen the influence of the government over the judiciary.[36] CEPRIS, alongside six other non-governmental organisations and a group of judges, sent an appeal to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Judiciary in January 2026.[37] The rapporteur Margaret Satterthwaite responded in March, criticising the laws, saying that they do not meet international standards regarding the independence of judiciary.[38]

Dolovac opposed the changes, criticising lack of discussion and abandoning the principles of the European Union.[39] The prosecutor Bojana Savović said that the with the proposer ignoring public discussion, the government ignored rule of law and opinions from judicial experts. She also criticised changes to the Prosecutor's Office for High-Tech Crime.[40] Jasmina Paunović, a retired prosecutor, voiced her opposition to Mrdić's Laws, saying that the proposed changes would be a step backward for the judiciary as a whole.[41] Radovan Lazić, a prosecutor from Novi Sad, and Katarina Golubović, the president of the Committe of Lawyers for Human Rights Jukom, also expressed their opposition, especially criticising lack of discussion.[31][42] Vesna Rakić Vodinelić [sr], a law professor, said that with the adoption of Mrdić's Laws, the Serbian government essencially ended the process of the accession of Serbia to the European Union.[43] Jovana Spremo from the Committee of Lawyers for Human Rights (YUCOM) said that the government's goal is to rein in the TOK,[44] as well as abandoning the accession to the European Union.[45]

A number of lawyers attended a protest against the proposed changes on 7 December 2025.[46] Several protests organised by lawyers, prosecutors, and judges were organised throughout February 2026, namely on 6,[47] 9,[48] 10,[49] and 21 February.[50]

European Union

edit
European Commissioners Marta Kos and Michael McGrath expressed their opposition to the changes

The European Union reacted negatively to the proposed laws. Marta Kos, the European Commissioner for Enlargement, said that the National Assembly should audit the adopted changes, saying that the changes put Serbia away from its accession to the European Union.[51] A European Commission representative also said that the changes put Serbia "a step back" in regards to the accession to the European Union.[52] The representative also said that the European Commission also hopes the laws would not be practised until the Venice Commission gives its opinion.[53] The European Commission also issued a request to the government to reconsider the adopted changes.[54] Michael McGrath, the European Commissioner for Justice, also expressed concerns about Mrdić's Laws, advising the government to suspend the changes to the laws.[55] A delegation of the European Union in Serbia, led by Andreas von Bekerath, also expressed disagreement with the proposals.[56] Sandro Gozi, a member of the European Parliament, said that the European Commission should also reconsider ending the discussions about the accession of Serbia to the European Union.[57]

McGrath met with Vujić, the minister of justice of Serbia, in early February, where they discussed Mrdić's Laws. Vujić informed McGrath that the government was seeking an opinion from the Venice Commission, while the European Commission advised to suspend the changes.[58] On 14 February, Vučić met with Kos, discussing Mrdić's Laws.[59] A month later, Kos met with Brnabić.[60]

Political opposition

edit

The political opposition reacted negatively to the proposals,[31] saying that the judiciary would essentially be put under the control of the government,[19] while also criticising lack of discussion.[31] They say that the TOK, which is investigating several government officials, would be effectively dissolved and that the judiciary would lose its independence.[19] Part of the opposition also said that the laws were essentially a coup d'état.[30]

Pavle Grbović, the president of the Movement of Free Citizens (PSG) and a member of the Judiciary Committee in the National Assembly, said that the proposed amendments would establish "a more desired balance of power" (poželjniji balans moći) in favour of the SNS government.[9] Branko Pavlović from the We – Voice from the People and Branko Lukić from the We – Power of the People, both lawyers, also opposed the changes, stating their reasonings during a session in the National Assembly.[61] Miloš Pavlović from the People's Movement of Serbia (NPS) also negatively reacted to the changes, saying that the government would then confront its judicial opponents, while also criticising lack of discussion.[33] Savo Manojlović from the Kreni-Promeni said that Mrdić's Laws would lead Serbia into a dictatorship.[62] Zdravko Ponoš, the president of the Serbia Centre,[63] Marinika Tepić of the Party of Freedom and Justice,[64] Radomir Lazović of the Green–Left Front (ZLF),[65] and the Democratic Party also expressed their opposition to the changes.[66]

The ZLF, PSG, NPS, and New Face of Serbia parliamentary groups in the National Assembly submitted a request to the Consitutional Court to assess the constitutionality of Mrdić's Laws in February 2026.[67] The Constitutional Court began working on the case a month later.[68]

Aftermath

edit

European Union funds

edit

Radar notes that the European Union did not send funds to Serbia on 27 January, but did not specify whether it was because of Mrdić's Laws. Despite this, the European Commission said that the government should have held a transparent discussion with the European Commission and the Venice Commission. A European Commission representative also said that they expect Serbia to align their judicial standards with the European Union.[31] On 13 February, Kos said that there is a possibility that the European Union could block €1.6 billion worth of funds to Serbia.[69] The European Commission confirmed this in April.[70]

Venice Commission response

edit

In response to the negative reception, Brnabić announced that the government would seek an opinion from the Venice Commission.[71] The Venice Commission responded by saying that it will discuss the changes during its session in June.[72] In March, the representatives of the Venice Commission visited Serbia, discussing the laws with Brnabić, Vujić, MPs, various prosecutors, and non-governmental organisations.[73] Shortly thereafter, the Venice Commission published a document in which the Serbian government explained the Mrdić's Laws in detail,[74] while also sending it some of its own proposals. The High Council of the Prosecutor's Office declined to adopt the proposals.[75]

The Ministry of Justice created a working group on 28 April to discuss the proposals sent by the Venice Commission.[76] Its first meeting was held a day later,[77] while its second one was held on 4 May.[78] Mrdić was confirmed as one of its members on 5 May.[79] The Ministry of Justice sent its "improved texts" of the changed laws to the Venice Commission, European Commission, and the European Union on 18 May.[80] Insajder reported that the "improved texts" aligned more with the proposals of the Venice Commission.[81]

On 12 and 13 June, the Venice Commission met to discuss Mrdić's Laws; Brnabić was present at the plenary session.[82] After the first day, Brnabić said that the Venice Commission gave a positive response on the improved texts and that the National Assembly will vote on them again in the same month. Minister Vujić also said that Serbia fully adopted the Commission's proposals.[83] The Venice Commission, however, has not publicly responded to Brnabić's claims.[84]

See also

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ↑ The journalist Sandra Petrušić of Radar noted that despite his support of the changes, Jovanov had previously praised the Serbian judiciary and the government's work on making the judiciary more independent.[31]

References

edit
  1. 1 2 "Ko je Uglješa Mrdić, naprednjak koji štrajkuje glađu jer nije zadovoljan radom tužilaštva" [Who is Uglješa Mrdić, a Progressive who is on hunger strike because he is not satisfied with the work of the prosecution]. Danas (in Serbian). 4 November 2025. Retrieved 29 April 2026.
  2. ↑ "Poslanik SNS-a Uglješa Mrdić tvrdi da je otpočeo štrajk glađu, kaže da nije zadovoljan radom tužilaštva" [SNS MP Uglješa Mrdić claims that he started a hunger strike, says that he is not satisfied with the work of the prosecution]. Insajder (in Serbian). 31 October 2025. Retrieved 29 April 2026.
  3. ↑ "Vučić za RTS: Naredna sedmica ključna za pronalaženje rešenja za NIS, očekujem da u ponedeljak ili utorak zatražimo izuzeće od američkih sankcija" [Vučić for RTS: The next week is crucial for finding a solution for NIS, I expect that on Monday or Tuesday we will request an exemption from American sanctions]. Radio Television of Serbia (in Serbian). 8 November 2025. Retrieved 29 April 2026.
  4. ↑ "Uglješa Mrdić prekinuo štrajk glađu: "Prima terapiju, više nije mogao da izdrži"" [Uglješa Mrdić ended his hunger strike: "He is receiving therapy, he couldn't take it anymore"]. NOVA portal (in Serbian). 10 November 2025. Retrieved 29 April 2026.
  5. ↑ "Uglješa Mrdić: Pravosuđe nije u dobrom stanju, ali država je jača od tužilačkog terorizma" [Uglješa Mrdić: The judiciary is not in a good state, but the state is stronger than prosecutorial terrorism]. Tanjug (in Serbian). 30 November 2025. Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  6. ↑ "Uglješa Mrdić: Oni koji vode Vrhovno tužilaštvo i Tužilaštvo za organizovani kriminal direktno rade protiv Srbije" [Uglješa Mrdić: Those who lead the Supreme Prosecutor's Office and the Prosecutor's Office for Organized Crime are directly working against Serbia]. Tanjug (in Serbian). 7 December 2025. Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  7. ↑ Karović, Boban (20 December 2025). "S optužbi na tužbe: Zagorka Dolovac i Uglješa Mrdić u sve većem klinču" [From accusations to lawsuits: Zagorka Dolovac and Uglješa Mrdić in an ever-increasing clinch]. NIN (in Serbian). Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  8. 1 2 Petrušić, Luka (12 December 2025). "Postoji li podobna mera samostalnosti" [Is there a suitable measure of independence?]. Radar (in Serbian). Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  9. 1 2 3 Stevanović, Katarina (23 December 2025). "Bitka za pravosuđe: Šta se krije iza Mrdićevih izmena zakona" [The battle for justice: What is hidden behind Mrdić's changes to the law]. Vreme (in Serbian). Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  10. ↑ Bogosavljev, Sofija (18 September 2025). "Istraga u slučaju nadstrešnica stoji u mestu jer Vesić nije saslušan" [The investigation in the canopies case is at a standstill because Vesić was not heard]. KRIK (in Serbian). Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  11. ↑ Radenković Jeremić, Milica (5 December 2025). "Slučaj Generalštab: Šta je sve sporno" [The General Staff case: What is in dispute]. BBC News (in Serbian). Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  12. ↑ "TOK podigao optužni predlog protiv Nikole Selakovića i još troje u slučaju "Generalštab"" [TOK filed an indictment against Nikola Selaković and three others in the "General Staff" case]. N1 (in Serbian). 15 December 2025. Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  13. ↑ "Selaković: Optužbe su politička konstrukcija, Generalštab nikada nije bio kulturno dobro" [Selaković: The accusations are a political construction, the General Staff was never a cultural asset]. NIN (in Serbian). 20 December 2025. Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  14. ↑ Mladenović, Jovan (15 December 2025). "Afera "Generalštab" još nije gotova: Studenti upozoravaju šta sad može da se dogodi" [The "General Staff" affair is not over yet: Students warn of what could happen now]. NOVA portal (in Serbian). Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  15. ↑ "Uglješa Mrdić: TOK jedan od najvećih gubitaša, nisu samo deo obojene revolucije, već i štetočine" [Uglješa Mrdić: TOK is one of the biggest losers, they are not only part of the coloured revolution, but also pests]. Danas (in Serbian). 26 November 2025. Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  16. 1 2 3 4 "Šta predviđaju izmene zakona koje je predložio Uglješa Mrdić" [What do the amendments to the law proposed by Uglješa Mrdić envisage?]. Tanjug (in Serbian). 22 December 2025. Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  17. 1 2 Cvijić, Vuk (16 January 2026). "Zaustavljanje rada Tužilaštva za organizovani kriminal" [Suspension of the Prosecutor's Office for Organised Crime]. Radar (in Serbian). Retrieved 2 May 2026.
  18. ↑ Medović, Vladimir (16 March 2026). "Odbrana Oskara" [In defense of Oskar]. Radar (in Serbian). Retrieved 2 May 2026.
  19. 1 2 3 4 5 Maričić, Slobodan (21 January 2026). "Vučić potpisao 'Mrdićeve pravosudne zakone' uprkos kritikama EU" [Vučić signed 'Mrdić's judicial laws' despite EU criticism]. BBC News (in Serbian). Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  20. 1 2 Jeremić, Vuk (28 January 2026). "Usvojeni Mrdićevi zakoni: Šta to znači za pravosuđe i da li će sve izmene moći da budu sprovedene" [Mrdić's Laws Adopted: What Does It Mean for the Judiciary and Will All the Changes Be Implemented]. Insajder (in Serbian). Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  21. ↑ "Advokat Popović: Svaki student prava zna da "Mrdićevi zakoni" podrivaju državno uređenje" [Attorney Popović: Every law student knows that "Mrdić's Laws" undermine the state system]. N1 (in Serbian). 2 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  22. ↑ "Skupština usvojila Mrdićeve zakone" [Parliament adopted Mrdić's Laws]. Danas (in Serbian). 28 January 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  23. ↑ "Vučić potpisao "Mrdićeve zakone"" [Vučić signed "Mrdić's Laws"]. N1 (in Serbian). 30 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  24. 1 2 Novaković, Ana (9 February 2026). ""Mrdićevi zakoni" i zvanično na snazi – šta njihova primena znači u praksi" ["Mrdić's Laws" officially in force – what their application means in practice]. N1 (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  25. ↑ "Detalji glasanja za Zakon o izmenama Zakona o Visokom savetu tužilaštva" [Details of the vote for the Law on Amendments to the Law on the High Council of Prosecutions]. Otvoreni Parlament (in Serbian). Retrieved 26 May 2026.
  26. ↑ "Detalji glasanja za Zakon o izmenama i dopunama Zakona o sedištima i područjima sudova i javnih tužilaštava" [Details of the vote for the Law on Amendments to the Law on Seats and Areas of Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices]. Otvoreni Parlament (in Serbian). Retrieved 26 May 2026.
  27. ↑ "Detalji glasanja za Zakon o izmenama i dopunama Zakona o organizaciji i nadležnosti državnih organa za borbu protiv visokotehnološkog kriminala" [Details of the vote for the Law on Amendments to the Law on the Organisation and Competenceies of State Authorities to Fight High-Tech Crime]. Otvoreni Parlament (in Serbian). Retrieved 26 May 2026.
  28. ↑ "Detalji glasanja za Zakon o izmenama i dopunama Zakona o javnom tužilaštvu" [Details of the vote for the Law on Amendments to the Law on Public Prosecutions]. Otvoreni Parlament (in Serbian). Retrieved 26 May 2026.
  29. ↑ "Detalji glasanja za Zakon o izmeni Zakona o sudijama" [Details of the vote for the Law on Amendments to the Law on Judges]. Otvoreni Parlament (in Serbian). Retrieved 26 May 2026.
  30. 1 2 Sovilj, Miodrag (5 February 2026). "Da li su Mrdićevi zakoni državni udar? "Namera je da se sud potpuno zaključa kako ne bi moglo da se sudi članovima SNS"" [Are Mrdić's Laws a coup? "The intention is to completely lock the court so that members of the SNS cannot be tried"]. N1 (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  31. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Petrušić, Sandra (29 January 2026). "Atentat na pravosuđe" [Assassination of the judiciary]. Radar (in Serbian). Retrieved 2 May 2026.
  32. ↑ "Skupštinski odbor za pravosuđe podržao "Mrdićeve zakone"" [The Judiciary Committee in the National Assembly supported "Mrdić's Laws"]. 021.rs (in Serbian). 13 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  33. 1 2 Đokić, Anđela (28 January 2026). "Šta sve treba da se desi da "Mrdićevi zakoni" stupe na snagu nakon odluke Skupštine" [What all needs to happen for "Mrdić's Laws" to come into force after the decision of the Assembly]. NOVA portal (in Serbian). Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  34. ↑ "Petrov: Mrdić pogrešio što nije zatražio mišljenje od VSS i VST" [Petrov: Mrdić made a mistake in not asking for an opinion from the VSS and the VST]. Insajder (in Serbian). 28 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  35. ↑ "Starović: Evropski put Srbije nije blokiran zbog tzv. Mrdićevih zakona" [Starović: Serbia's European route is not blocked because of the so-called Mrdić's Laws]. Danas (in Serbian). 19 March 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  36. ↑ "Opasnost od usvajanja pravosudnih zakona" [The danger of the adoption of judicial laws]. Centre for Judicial Research (in Serbian). 26 December 2025. Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  37. ↑ "CEPRIS i druge organizacije se obratile UN zbog izmene pravosudnih zakona" [CEPRIS and other organisations appealed to the UN to change the judicial laws]. 021.rs (in Serbian). 15 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  38. ↑ "Specijalna izvestiteljka UN pisala Vladi zbog "Mrdićevih zakona": Rizik od političkog pritiska, odmazde, narušavanja nezavisnosti" [The UN Special Rapporteur wrote to the Government about the "Mrdić Laws": Risk of political pressure, retaliation, violation of independence]. N1 (in Serbian). 27 March 2026. Retrieved 25 March 2026.
  39. ↑ "Dolovac posle sastanka sa ambasadorkom Nemačke: Donošenje zakona bez javne rasprave i usklađenosti sa tekovinama EU – korak unazad" [Dolovac after the meeting with the German ambassador: Passing the law without public discussion and compliance with EU acquis – a step backwards]. Insajder (in Serbian). 16 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  40. ↑ "Koliko su opasni Mrdićevi zakoni: Jedan od ciljeva da se sloboda mišljenja na društvenim mrežama potpuno ukine" [How dangerous are Mrdić's Laws: One of the goals is to completely abolish freedom of thought on social networks]. Danas (in Serbian). 28 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  41. ↑ Jeremić, Vuk (19 November 2025). "Vlast najavljuje promene pravosudnih zakona: Šta je cilj inicijative da JTOK pređe pod ingerencije VJT?" [The government announces changes to judicial laws: What is the goal of the initiative for JTOK to come under the jurisdiction of VJT?]. Insajder (in Serbian). Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  42. ↑ Jeremić, Vuk (17 January 2026). "Sud se deli, a tužilaštvo ukida: Koje posledice bi imalo formiranje novih pravosudnih institucija koje predviđaju Mrdićevi zakoni" [The court is divided, and the prosecution is abolished: What consequences would the formation of new judicial institutions provided for by Mrdić's Laws have?]. Insajder (in Serbian). Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  43. ↑ Lazić, Miloš Ž. (30 January 2026). ""Stefanović će kontrolisati istrage": Mrdićevi zakoni stupaju na snagu, a šta to znači za građane Srbije objašnjava profesorka prava" ["Stefanović will control the investigations": Mrdić's Laws come into force, and what this means for the citizens of Serbia, the law professor explains]. NOVA portal (in Serbian). Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  44. ↑ "Spremo (YUCOM): Amandmani pokazali da su Mrdićevi zakoni sredstvo protiv TOK-a" [Spremo (YUCOM): The amendments showed that Mrdić's Laws are a tool against TOK]. N1 (in Serbian). 16 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  45. ↑ "Spremo: Potpisivanje "Mrdićevih zakona" bio bi signal EU da Srbija odustaje od evropskog puta" [Spremo: Signing the "Mrdić Laws" would be a signal to the EU that Serbia is abandoning the European path]. N1 (in Serbian). 30 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  46. ↑ "Protest pravnika ispred Ustavnog suda: Predstavnici vlasti bez zazora gaze Ustav i zakone" [Protest of lawyers in front of the Constitutional Court: Representatives of the authorities trample the Constitution and laws without restraint]. Insajder (in Serbian). 7 December 2025. Retrieved 30 April 2026.
  47. ↑ "Zaposleni u TOK-u i danas protestovali, počinje primena "Mrdićevih zakona"" [TOK employees protested today again, implementation of "Mrdić's Laws" begins]. N1 (in Serbian). 6 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  48. ↑ ""Smene umesto čestitki": Protest podrške zaposlenima u pravosuđu u 18h ispred Ustavnog suda u Beogradu" ["Shifts instead of congratulations": Protest in support of judicial employees at 6 p.m. in front of the Constitutional Court in Belgrade]. Mašina (in Serbian). 9 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  49. ↑ "Advokati organizovali protest ispred zgrade novosadskih sudova i tužilaštva zbog "Mrdićevih zakona"" [Lawyers organised a protest in front of the Novi Sad courts and prosecutor's office because of the "Mrdić Laws"]. Danas (in Serbian). 10 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  50. ↑ ""Marš za pravosuđe" završen šetnjom do TOK-a, zaposleni u tužilaštvu ih dočekali aplauzom" [The "March for Justice" ended with a walk to the TOK, employees of the prosecutor's office greeted them with applause]. N1 (in Serbian). 21 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  51. ↑ Gajić, Dušan (29 January 2026). "Marta Kos ponovo pozvala Srbiju na reviziju usvojenih izmena pravosudnih zakona" [Marta Kos once again called on Serbia to review the adopted amendments to judicial laws]. Radio Television of Serbia (in Serbian). Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  52. ↑ Nešić, Nenad (28 January 2026). "Hoće li Mrdićevi zakoni stupiti na snagu: Skupštinski epilog imamo, na potezu predsednik države" [Will Mrdić's Laws come into force: We have the parliamentary epilogue, and the president of the country is on his way]. N1 (in Serbian). Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  53. ↑ Radišić, Nikola (17 March 2026). "EU očekuje da se "Mrdićevi zakoni" ne primenjuju dok Venecijanska komisija ne iznese svoje mišljenje" [The EU expects the "Mrdić Laws" not to be implemented until the Venice Commission delivers its opinion]. N1 (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  54. ↑ "EK o Mrdićevim zakonima: Podrivaju nezavisnost pravosuđa i autonomiju tužilaštva, korak nazad Srbije" [EC on Mrdić's Laws: They undermine the independence of the judiciary and the autonomy of the prosecution, a step backwards for Serbia]. Danas (in Serbian). 28 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  55. ↑ "Evropska komisija ponovo poziva na reviziju "Mrdićevih zakona"" [The European Commission calls again for the revision of the "Mrdić Laws"]. Vreme (in Serbian). 5 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  56. ↑ "Delegacija EU: Izmene pravosudnih zakona ozbiljan korak unazad, potreban hitan zaokret" [EU Delegation: Amendments to judicial laws are a serious step backwards, an urgent turnaround is needed]. 021.rs (in Serbian). 30 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  57. ↑ Nikolić, Maja (31 January 2026). "Jesu li Srbija i EU jedno za drugo: Potpisivanjem pravosudnih zakona Vučić gurnuo "prst u oko" Briselu" [Are Serbia and the EU for each other: By signing the judicial laws, Vučić poked a "finger in the eye" of Brussels]. N1 (in Serbian). Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  58. ↑ Bulajić, Jelena (6 February 2026). "Da li će Vučić reterirati pod pritiskom Evrope i proglasiti propast Mrdićevih zakona: Ako je odgovor "da", ovo mora da uradi" [Will Vučić retaliate under pressure from Europe and declare the demise of Mrdić's Laws: If the answer is "yes", he must do this]. NOVA portal (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  59. ↑ "Vučić se u Minhenu sastao sa evropskom komesarkom za proširenje Martom Kos i izaslanikom SAD Ričardom Grenelom" [In Munich, Vučić met with the European Commissioner for Enlargement, Marta Kos, and the US envoy, Richard Grenell]. Insajder (in Serbian). 14 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  60. ↑ Radišić, Nikola (18 March 2026). "Kos za N1 nakon sastanka sa Brnabić: Procenjujemo i da li Srbija i dalje ispunjava uslove za sredstva EU" [Kos for N1 after the meeting with Brnabić: We are also assessing whether Serbia still meets the conditions for EU funds]. N1 (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  61. ↑ ""Mrdićevi zakoni": Kad pravosudni sistem menja neko za koga javnost do pre par meseci nije ni znala" ["Mrdić's Laws": When the justice system is changed by someone the public didn't even know about until a few months ago]. Danas (in Serbian). 16 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  62. ↑ "Manojlović: Mrdićevi zakoni vode Srbiju u diktaturu i kraj EU puta" [Manojlović: Mrdić's Laws are leading Serbia into a dictatorship and the end of the EU process]. Danas (in Serbian). 30 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  63. ↑ "Ponoš: Vlast remontuje pravosuđe kako bi sklonili ljude koji Vučića ne zovu šefom" [Ponoš: The authorities are overhauling the judiciary in order to remove people who do not call Vučić the boss]. Danas (in Serbian). 21 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  64. ↑ "Tepić: Saradnja parlamentarne i vanparlamentarne opozicije neophodna za promene" [Tepić: Cooperation between the parliamentary and non-parliamentary opposition is necessary for change]. N1 (in Serbian). 24 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  65. ↑ "Radomir Lazović o zahtevu Marte Kos" [Radomir Lazović on the request of Marta Kos]. Danas (in Serbian). 29 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  66. ↑ "DS: Usvajanje pravosudnih zakona ukazuje da smo na pragu još jedne unapred režirane epizode" [DS: The passage of the Judiciary Laws indicates that we are on the verge of another pre-directed episode]. Danas (in Serbian). 28 January 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
  67. ↑ "Poslaničke grupe NPS, NLS, ZLF i PSG podnele predlog Ustavnom sudu za ocenu ustavnosti seta pravosudnih zakona" [Parliamentary groups NPS, NLS, ZLF, and PSG submitted a proposal to the Constitutional Court to assess the constitutionality of a set of judicial laws]. N1 (in Serbian). 5 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  68. ↑ Jeremić, Vuk (23 March 2026). "Ustavni sud počeo rad na oceni Mrdićevih zakona, zatražili izjašnjenje od Narodne skupštine" [The Constitutional Court started work on the evaluation of Mrdić's Laws, they requested a statement from the National Assembly]. Insajder (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  69. ↑ "Srbija u riziku da joj budu uskraćena sredstva iz EU zbog pravosudnih zakona" [Serbia is at risk of being denied funds from the EU due to judicial laws]. Savremena politika (in Serbian). 13 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  70. ↑ Tuhina, Gjeraqina (11 April 2026). "EU upozorava Srbiju: Bez novca iz Plana rasta dok su na snazi 'Mrdićevi zakoni'" [EU warns Serbia: No money from the Growth Plan while 'Mrdić's Laws' are in force]. Radio Free Europe (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  71. ↑ "Brnabić: Mrdićevi zakoni će ići na post festum analizu Venecijanske komisije" [Brnabić: Mrdić's Laws will be subject to a post festum analysis by the Venice Commission]. 021.rs (in Serbian). 2 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  72. ↑ "Venecijanska komisija: Mišljenje o zakonima Srbije na sednici u junu" [Venice Commission: Opinion on the laws of Serbia at the session in June]. Insajder (in Serbian). 19 February 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  73. ↑ "Kad Venecijanska komisija objavljuje i usvaja mišljenje o Srbiji?" [When does the Venice Commission publish and adopt its opinion on Serbia?]. Danas (in Serbian). 19 March 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  74. ↑ Radišić, Nikola (24 March 2026). "Venecijanska komisija objavila dokument u kom Srbija objašnjava Mrdićeve zakone" [The Venice Commission published a document in which Serbia explains Mrdić's Laws]. N1 (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  75. ↑ "Visoki savet tužilaštva odbio preporuku Venecijanske komisije, saznaje Danas" [The High Prosecution Council rejected the recommendation of the Venice Commission, Danas learns]. Mašina (in Serbian). 28 April 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  76. ↑ "Oformljena Radna grupa za pripremu "Mrdićevih zakona" u cilju usklađivanja sa preporukama Venecijanske komisije" [Formed working group for the preparation of "Mrdić's Laws" in order to harmonise them with the recommendations of the Venice Commission]. N1 (in Serbian). 28 April 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  77. ↑ "Prvi sastanak Radne grupe za usklađivanje Mrdićevih zakona sa preporukama Venecijanske komisije" [The first meeting of the working group for harmonising Mrdić's Laws with the recommendations of the Venice Commission]. N1 (in Serbian). 29 April 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  78. ↑ "Održan drugi sastanak Radne grupe za usklađivanje "Mrdićevih zakona" sa preporukama Venecijanske komisije" [The second meeting of the working group for harmonising the "Mrdić Laws" with the recommendations of the Venice Commission was held]. N1 (in Serbian). Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  79. ↑ "Uglješa Mrdić postavljen u Radnu grupu za izmenu "Mrdićevih zakona"" [Uglješa Mrdić appointed to the working group for the amendment of the "Mrdić Laws"]. Nedeljnik (in Serbian). 5 May 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  80. ↑ "Unapređeni tekstovi Mrdićevih zakona prosleđeni Venecijanskoj komisiji, EK i EU" [The improved texts of Mrdić's Laws forwarded to the Venice Commission, the EC, and the EU]. 021.rs (in Serbian). 18 May 2026. Retrieved 25 May 2026.
  81. ↑ Jeremić, Vuk (25 May 2026). "Šta je cilj Mrdićevih zakona: Nova verzija izmena bliža preporukama Venecijanske komisije, ali poruka tužiocima je već poslata" [What is the goal of Mrdić's Laws: The new version of the changes is closer to the recommendations of the Venice Commission, but the message to the prosecutors has already been sent]. Insajder (in Serbian). Retrieved 14 June 2026.
  82. ↑ "Venecijanska komisija danas o izmenama pravosudnih zakona u Srbiji, učestvuje i Brnabić" [Brnabić is also participating in the Venice Commission today on changes to judicial laws in Serbia]. Danas (in Serbian). 12 June 2026. Retrieved 14 June 2026.
  83. ↑ "Brnabić: Venecijanska komisija dala pozitivno mišljenje o izmenama pravosudnih zakona" [Brnabić: The Venice Commission gave a positive opinion on the changes to judicial laws]. N1 (in Serbian). 12 June 2026. Retrieved 14 June 2026.
  84. ↑ Vukajlović, Nađa (14 June 2026). "Venecijanska komisija navodno podržala izmene Mrdićevih zakona: Da li je time rešen problem?" [The Venice Commission allegedly supported the amendments to Mrdić's Laws: Did that solve the problem?]. Danas (in Serbian). Retrieved 14 June 2026.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mrdić%27s_Laws&oldid=1359320777"