"They got a slap on the wrist and are now correcting mistakes, the main proponent is Vučić": Opposition on the amended "Mrdić laws"

Serbian opposition parties have strongly criticized the government's proposed amendments to the so-called "Mrdić laws," labeling them as an effort to rectify errors after receiving criticism. Aleksandar Ivanović of the NPS stated that the authorities "got a slap on the wrist and are now correcting mistakes." Goran Petrović of the SSP described the situation as a "collapse of the legal system" unfolding before their eyes, identifying Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić as the primary architect behind the legislative changes.

“

the authorities "got a slap on the wrist and are now correcting mistakes."

Petrović suggested that while Vučić may not be a strong legal mind, he directed the ministry to draft these laws. Ivanović further elaborated on the parliamentary session's procedure, deeming it "established practice." He criticized the urgent procedure and the inclusion of 32 points on the agenda for a unified debate, arguing it severely limits the opposition's maneuverability to engage with voters.

“

the "collapse of the legal system" unfolding before their eyes

Ivanović highlighted that the "Mrdić laws" have returned to parliament, and the current amendments are a direct response to the Venice Commission's report. He noted the commission expressed regret and concern over the original law's procedure, issuing nine remarks that indicated the legislative solutions significantly undermined the independence of the public prosecutor's office. The government, however, presents these changes as an "improvement of the model," a move Ivanović dismissed as "playing with terminology" while controlling the media narrative for years.

“

He is the one who devised how this should look. Perhaps not legally, because I don't think he is such a good lawyer, but he engaged the Ministry that devised these laws.

Addressing discrepancies between the law submitted to the Venice Commission and the one debated in parliament, Petrović dismissed the Minister of Justice's explanation of "translation errors" as impossible for such critical matters. The Ministry of Justice stated the only difference was the language, with the parliamentary text being in Serbian, while the commission's official languages are English and French. Petrović emphasized the critical nature of these laws, stating they are central to the ongoing "collapse of the legal system" and were initially intended to institutionalize executive influence over the judiciary.

“

what is happening today - is established practice.