Professor claims court decision on Vesić case delayed by judge recusal requests

A law professor alleges that the Appellate Court in Novi Sad reached a decision two weeks ago concerning the case against former minister Goran Vesić and others accused in the 2024 canopy collapse at the Novi Sad train station. Bojan Pajtić, a law professor, stated on social media that the decision was made by judges Snežana Leković, Nikola Radanović, and Bora Pap. He claims the decision was sent for publication, but Vesić's lawyers subsequently requested the recusal of judges Leković and Radanović, as well as the court president Darko Tadić.

Pajtić argues that Serbian law does not permit recusal requests after a court decision has been made in a way that would prevent its publication and enforcement. He described the situation as unprecedented in judicial practice. The Appellate Court in Novi Sad has not commented on whether a decision was made or addressed Pajtić's claims.

“

The criminal panel of the Appellate Court in Novi Sad made a decision on the appeals in the case against former minister Goran Vesić and others accused of the canopy collapse at the Novi Sad train station two weeks ago, but it has not yet been published due to subsequently filed requests for the recusal of judges.

The case involves the collapse of a canopy at the Novi Sad train station on November 1, 2024, which resulted in 16 fatalities and one serious injury. The indictment includes Goran Vesić, former acting director of "Infrastruktura železnice Srbije" Jelena Tanasković, former director Nebojša Šurlan, assistant minister Anita Dimoski, and nine others, including designers and those responsible for expert supervision during the station's reconstruction. They face charges related to general safety violations during the construction and oversight of the works. The indictment confirmation process has been returned for reconsideration multiple times.

“

Serbian legislation does not recognize the possibility of requesting the recusal of judges after a court decision has been made in a way that would prevent its publication and entry into force.