Update
The Cluster 3 note and the Rule of Law report: two pictures ...
Within a single fortnight in July 2026, the European Commission produced two documents about the sam...
Summary
Following reports published in Informer about a proposed change to a provision of the University of Belgrade (UB) Statute concerning the election of candidates for rector, the Ministry of Education announced an extraordinary inspection of the procedure for amending the UB Statute.
As announced, the inspection is difficult to reconcile with the legal limits of the education inspection's powers. If it is aimed at the content of the Statute itself, the inspection would exceed its legal powers and interfere with the University's autonomy, which is guaranteed by the Constitution, the Law on Higher Education and the UB Statute.
That autonomy expressly includes the right to adopt the statute and to elect governing bodies - the University's right to regulate its own internal organisation. The Law on Education Inspection, by contrast, confers no power to review the content of a university's highest act, nor to assess the justification or expediency of a proposed amendment. An inspection whose object were the lawfulness of the amended provisions would therefore fall outside the inspection's competence.
What remains genuinely open is the narrower question of whether the inspection may review the lawfulness of the procedure itself, without entering into the content of the Statute. Even then, it is questionable whether a media report of a propaganda-political nature is an adequate basis for opening an extraordinary inspection ex officio.
As announced, the inspection is difficult to reconcile with the legal limits of the education inspection's powers. If it is aimed at the content of the Statute itself, the inspection would exceed its legal powers and interfere with the University's autonomy, which is guaranteed by the Constitution, the Law on Higher Education and the UB Statute.
That autonomy expressly includes the right to adopt the statute and to elect governing bodies - the University's right to regulate its own internal organisation. The Law on Education Inspection, by contrast, confers no power to review the content of a university's highest act, nor to assess the justification or expediency of a proposed amendment. An inspection whose object were the lawfulness of the amended provisions would therefore fall outside the inspection's competence.
What remains genuinely open is the narrower question of whether the inspection may review the lawfulness of the procedure itself, without entering into the content of the Statute. Even then, it is questionable whether a media report of a propaganda-political nature is an adequate basis for opening an extraordinary inspection ex officio.
Context
On 13 July 2026, Informer reported that an extraordinary online session of the Council had been scheduled at the University of Belgrade to decide on a proposed amendment to the Statute. A document titled "Proposal of the decision on amending the Statute of the University of Belgrade", signed by the Rector and President of the Senate Dr Vladan Đokić, was also published; it envisages amending the provision on how a candidate for rector is elected - so that a majority of all Council members is required instead of one third of the votes.
The Ministry of Education announced on 20 July that, in order to protect the reputation and integrity of the University of Belgrade, it would carry out an extraordinary inspection to establish the facts and circumstances relating to the procedure for changing the Statute, prompted by allegations of irregularities during the vote on the proposed amendments. It announced that the education inspection would take appropriate steps to establish the lawfulness of the Council's work and to remove any possible doubts about the regularity of the voting at that session.
The Ministry of Education announced on 20 July that, in order to protect the reputation and integrity of the University of Belgrade, it would carry out an extraordinary inspection to establish the facts and circumstances relating to the procedure for changing the Statute, prompted by allegations of irregularities during the vote on the proposed amendments. It announced that the education inspection would take appropriate steps to establish the lawfulness of the Council's work and to remove any possible doubts about the regularity of the voting at that session.
Powers of the education inspection
The tasks of inspection oversight over the work of higher-education institutions are laid down in Article 10 of the Law on Education Inspection.
This provision stipulates that the inspection oversees the application of laws and other regulations governing the organisation and manner of work of higher-education institutions, in particular (among other things) the procedure for electing governing and managing bodies and other bodies of the institution, and their manner of work.
However, the powers of the education inspection do not include the authority to review the content of the highest act of a higher-education institution (the statute), nor prior review of the justification or lawfulness of amendments. The assessment of constitutionality and legality is carried out by the Constitutional Court. Accordingly, the inspection has no right of oversight over the normative sphere of the work of higher-education institutions.
This provision stipulates that the inspection oversees the application of laws and other regulations governing the organisation and manner of work of higher-education institutions, in particular (among other things) the procedure for electing governing and managing bodies and other bodies of the institution, and their manner of work.
However, the powers of the education inspection do not include the authority to review the content of the highest act of a higher-education institution (the statute), nor prior review of the justification or lawfulness of amendments. The assessment of constitutionality and legality is carried out by the Constitutional Court. Accordingly, the inspection has no right of oversight over the normative sphere of the work of higher-education institutions.
University autonomy
Article 6, paragraph 1, item 4 of the Law on Higher Education provides that the autonomy of universities and other higher-education institutions entails the right to adopt the statute and to elect governing and other bodies (that is, to regulate their internal organisation within the limits of the law).
Article 10, paragraph 1 of the University of Belgrade Statute confirms this principle: "The autonomy of the University, in accordance with the law, includes the right to […] adopt the statute and elect governing and managing bodies and the student parliament."
Given that Article 63, paragraph 1, item 1 of the Law on Higher Education and Article 10 of the UB Statute provide that the Senate adopts the Statute, university autonomy entails the right to independently regulate the election procedure, in accordance with that law.
Article 10, paragraph 1 of the University of Belgrade Statute confirms this principle: "The autonomy of the University, in accordance with the law, includes the right to […] adopt the statute and elect governing and managing bodies and the student parliament."
Given that Article 63, paragraph 1, item 1 of the Law on Higher Education and Article 10 of the UB Statute provide that the Senate adopts the Statute, university autonomy entails the right to independently regulate the election procedure, in accordance with that law.
Conclusion
The education inspection has the right to review the ongoing work and conduct of the University's bodies, or to oversee a specific election of a rector or another governing body (not the preparations for a future election). By contrast, the adoption and amendment of the statute are expressly protected by university autonomy, as a guarantee under the Law on Higher Education and the UB Statute.
The question of the limits of inspection oversight does not concern whether the work of the bodies of higher-education institutions may be reviewed, but whether such oversight may enter into the autonomous process of adopting normative decisions at the University.
It can be concluded that an extraordinary inspection would exceed its statutory powers if its sole subject were an assessment of the lawfulness of the amended provisions of the UB Statute, because the inspection has not been given competence to review the content of that act, and the normative regulation of the University is a means of exercising university autonomy within the framework of the Law on Higher Education. It remains questionable, however, whether the education inspection may review the formal process itself, that is, the lawfulness of the procedure, without entering into the content of the Statute. In that regard, as to the inspection's power to oversee the work of a particular body, the question is whether the "manner of work" should be taken to include the (narrower) proceedings at the Council session devoted specifically to the statutory amendments.
The question also arises whether a media report, of a propaganda-political nature, is an adequate basis for conducting an extraordinary inspection ex officio.
The question of the limits of inspection oversight does not concern whether the work of the bodies of higher-education institutions may be reviewed, but whether such oversight may enter into the autonomous process of adopting normative decisions at the University.
An extraordinary inspection would exceed its statutory powers if its sole subject were an assessment of the lawfulness of the amended provisions of the UB Statute.
It can be concluded that an extraordinary inspection would exceed its statutory powers if its sole subject were an assessment of the lawfulness of the amended provisions of the UB Statute, because the inspection has not been given competence to review the content of that act, and the normative regulation of the University is a means of exercising university autonomy within the framework of the Law on Higher Education. It remains questionable, however, whether the education inspection may review the formal process itself, that is, the lawfulness of the procedure, without entering into the content of the Statute. In that regard, as to the inspection's power to oversee the work of a particular body, the question is whether the "manner of work" should be taken to include the (narrower) proceedings at the Council session devoted specifically to the statutory amendments.
The question also arises whether a media report, of a propaganda-political nature, is an adequate basis for conducting an extraordinary inspection ex officio.
