Mihić for N1: My complaint clearly indicates procedural violations, I am not optimistic

Vladimir Mihić, an associate professor at the University of Novi Sad's Faculty of Philosophy, has reached a critical juncture in his dispute over his non-re-election to his position. Mihić's complaint, which cites procedural violations, has been forwarded to the University, marking what he calls the final step in the process.

“

In the complaint, my results are clearly and unequivocally listed, from which it undoubtedly follows that I meet all the conditions (mandatory and elective) for re-election as an associate professor.

Mihić asserts that the complaint clearly outlines breaches of procedure, particularly highlighting the use of a secret ballot, which he claims contravenes the regulations for electing faculty members. He also points out that the Senate did not issue a formal decision on his election, but rather that the proposal for his election was not adopted. He emphasizes that his proposal was neither rejected nor voted down, nor was there a vote to return the election report to the relevant faculty councils.

“

Although I am not optimistic regarding the outcome, given that the complaint is decided by, practically, the same people who made the first-instance decision, I still hope that the majority of the members of the expanded Senate will find the courage to admit the mistakes that have undoubtedly been made and return the proposal to the Senate for reconsideration.

In his complaint, Mihić meticulously details his academic achievements, asserting they unequivocally meet all requirements for re-election as an associate professor. Despite his lack of optimism, stemming from the fact that the same individuals who made the initial decision are now reviewing his complaint, he expresses hope that the expanded Senate will demonstrate the courage to acknowledge the undeniable procedural errors.

“

The Senate did not make any decision about my election, except that the proposal for election was not adopted. It was not rejected, nor was there a vote on it, just as there was no vote on whether to return the election report to the Professional Council for Social Sciences or the Election Council of the Faculty of Philosophy, if necessary.

Dean Milivoj Alanović stated that a 30-day legal deadline began on July 3 for the University Senate, in its expanded capacity, to decide on Mihić's complaint. A six-member commission from the faculty's teaching staff will be appointed by the University Council to convene an expanded Senate session, likely in July. Alanović indicated that faculty representatives would advocate for their council's report, acknowledging that the use of a secret ballot, contrary to university statutes and regulations mandating public voting, provides grounds for the expanded Senate to return the matter for reconsideration.

“

The decision on non-election has not become final because Mihić timely filed a complaint, which is why the appellate body – the Senate in expanded composition – is now deciding on the matter.