Retired judge: 'Activism is not overthrowing the state'; charge is 'enemy propaganda'

Retired judge Savo Đurđić has strongly criticized the legal classification of "preparing to overthrow the constitutional order," labeling it as a relic of the "party system of the 1990s" and essentially "enemy propaganda." Đurđić, a member of CEPRIS, argues that this charge is frequently misused, devaluing its significance and leading to a situation where the public may struggle to distinguish between genuine threats to the state and mere activism.

“

The legal qualification of 'preparing to overthrow the constitutional order' comes from the 'party system of the 90s' and is actually 'enemy propaganda'.

Đurđić pointed out that in 2025 and the current year, over 30 individuals face charges under this statute. He contends that the charge has been diluted, often applied to acts of activism rather than concrete attempts to undermine the constitutional framework. "Every time someone discussed activism, it was qualified as preparing an act against the constitutional order, which is a criminal offense from the '90s party system that replaces enemy propaganda," he stated.

“

It is being abused, and in the future, the public will not know how to distinguish intimidation from the actual overthrow of order.

He expressed concern that when actual, evidence-based threats involving the use of force emerge, the public will be unable to differentiate them from instances of intimidation. Đurđić contrasted this with the actions of certain police units and para-formal groups, suggesting they pose a greater threat to the constitutional order than students discussing hypothetical scenarios like the use of an illegally acquired sound cannon.

“

Every time someone discussed activism, it was qualified as preparing an act against the constitutional order, which is a criminal offense from the '90s party system that replaces enemy propaganda.

The retired judge also warned of an impending "dirty election campaign" that will likely involve the "instrumentalization of legal means." He believes that legal reforms, such as the "Mrdić laws" criticized by the Venice Commission, are being implemented for personal reasons to prevent the rule of law, particularly concerning investigations into corruption and crime involving high-ranking officials. The relocation of prosecutors and the integration of the War Crimes Prosecutor's Office into the Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade are cited as consequences of these reforms.

“

When acts related to an attack on the constitutional order, with evidence and the threat of force, need to appear, not in public gatherings, but in organized action, we will not know how to distinguish intimidation from a real attack on the constitutional order.