Update
Council of Europe Commissioner warns of deteriorating human ...
Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Michael O’Flaherty visited Serbia from 18 to 2...
Demand #1
"Publication of the entire documentation regarding the reconstruction of the Railway Station in Novi Sad, currently unavailable to the public."
The students demanded the publication of the complete documentation regarding the reconstruction of the Railway Station in Novi Sad. The initial response to this request was that the documentation was solely in the possession of the Prosecutor's Office. Shortly after, it was incompletely published by other state authorities. "Our colleagues from the technical faculties and the Association of Architects of Serbia noted that the published documents lack the key documentation necessary to determine the criminal liability of those who oversaw and were involved in the reconstruction of the Railway Station. Specifically, missing documents include contracts that reveal who did what on the Railway Station, how much it cost, why the reconstruction costs increased fivefold, and who is responsible for the station being ceremoniously opened twice without a usage permit."
On December 12, the Government of the Republic of Serbia instructed the Ministry of Construction, Transport, and Infrastructure (MGSI) to publish all documents "available to the Ministry" and "related to the potential commission of a criminal offense due to the collapse of the canopy on the station building in Novi Sad." This wording allows the Ministry to refrain from publishing certain documents if they claim not to have them or believe they are unrelated to the canopy collapse. As a result, 195 documents were published compared to the 857 in the possession of the Prosecutor's Office."
The students demanded the publication of the complete documentation regarding the reconstruction of the Railway Station in Novi Sad. The initial response to this request was that the documentation was solely in the possession of the Prosecutor's Office. Shortly after, it was incompletely published by other state authorities. "Our colleagues from the technical faculties and the Association of Architects of Serbia noted that the published documents lack the key documentation necessary to determine the criminal liability of those who oversaw and were involved in the reconstruction of the Railway Station. Specifically, missing documents include contracts that reveal who did what on the Railway Station, how much it cost, why the reconstruction costs increased fivefold, and who is responsible for the station being ceremoniously opened twice without a usage permit."
On December 12, the Government of the Republic of Serbia instructed the Ministry of Construction, Transport, and Infrastructure (MGSI) to publish all documents "available to the Ministry" and "related to the potential commission of a criminal offense due to the collapse of the canopy on the station building in Novi Sad." This wording allows the Ministry to refrain from publishing certain documents if they claim not to have them or believe they are unrelated to the canopy collapse. As a result, 195 documents were published compared to the 857 in the possession of the Prosecutor's Office."
Demand #2
We demand confirmation from the competent authorities regarding the identity of all individuals suspected of physically assaulting students and professors, as well as the initiation of criminal proceedings against them. We also demand the dismissal of these individuals if it is established that they hold public office.
Due to the Ministry of Internal Affairs' lack of responsiveness regarding the aforementioned request, the professor and dean of the Faculty of Dramatic Arts (FDA) filed a criminal complaint with the Third Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office on December 2, 2024, on behalf of the faculty. The submitted complaint pertains to individuals reasonably suspected of physically assaulting students and professors of the mentioned faculty on November 22, 2024, and committing the criminal offenses of Violent Behavior as well as Violent Behavior at a Public Gathering or Sporting Event.
Due to the Ministry of Internal Affairs' lack of responsiveness regarding the aforementioned request, the professor and dean of the Faculty of Dramatic Arts (FDA) filed a criminal complaint with the Third Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office on December 2, 2024, on behalf of the faculty. The submitted complaint pertains to individuals reasonably suspected of physically assaulting students and professors of the mentioned faculty on November 22, 2024, and committing the criminal offenses of Violent Behavior as well as Violent Behavior at a Public Gathering or Sporting Event.
Demand #3
Dismissal of criminal charges against arrested and detained students at protests, as well as the termination of already initiated criminal proceedings.
In the previous period, government representatives stated that all participants in the civil protests had been released. However, this is not considered a fulfillment of the demands. Release from detention does not guarantee that these individuals will not be criminally prosecuted or that a guilty verdict will not be issued against them. In line with the above, we demand that all criminal charges against students and professors who participated in the civil protests be dismissed and, if criminal proceedings are already underway, that they be terminated.
In the previous period, government representatives stated that all participants in the civil protests had been released. However, this is not considered a fulfillment of the demands. Release from detention does not guarantee that these individuals will not be criminally prosecuted or that a guilty verdict will not be issued against them. In line with the above, we demand that all criminal charges against students and professors who participated in the civil protests be dismissed and, if criminal proceedings are already underway, that they be terminated.
Demand #4
A 20% increase in the budget for higher education
"The allocations for higher education provided by the Law on the Budget of the Republic of Serbia for the year 2025 from the sources of General revenues and budget receipts amount to 60.15 billion dinars (i.e., ~€510 million). The allocation for higher education includes the budget items Higher and university education (chapter 26.4), Student standard (chapter 26.5), and Criminal police university (chapter 15.1).
The students had every right to demand an increase of 20% of the previously mentioned funds (i.e., an increase of about 12.03 billion dinars, i.e., 102.8 million euros), which would bring the level of investment in higher education closer to the level of investment in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (1.71 % of GDP, according to OECD methodology).
Why has the demand not been fulfilled?
An increase in ""material costs"" by 20% was announced, which would lead to an increase in the total budget in the amount of only 4% (i.e., 22 million euros). ""Material costs"" therefore, mean only the segment of the budget for Higher and university education.
Instead of the requested improvement in the quality of higher education, part of the public was misled that the request was fulfilled.
Explanation of the request
The availability, affordability, and quality of higher education are the standard of a progressive society, and its financing must not be questioned. The state is obliged to provide conditions in which higher education is a choice that is available to everyone, with a quality that is competitive in the world rankings of universities. By shifting the financial burden from students to income from the budget, study conditions at all levels of study would be significantly facilitated, and greater participation of financially vulnerable categories of society in higher education would be enabled.
Therefore, we demand the introduction of new benefits that, after the amendment of the Law on Higher Education, would provide faculties with funds in the amount of 50% of the total value of ESPB points that students would otherwise pay. This would increase allocations for higher education without changing the price of the ESPB point itself (which is determined by the faculties), and students would pay 50% less tuition than the entire amount. We believe that this is the first step towards free education. Furthermore, we demand that the rest of the funds be evenly distributed among other budget items, Student standard and Higher and university education, excluding salaries and other incomes of employees."
"The allocations for higher education provided by the Law on the Budget of the Republic of Serbia for the year 2025 from the sources of General revenues and budget receipts amount to 60.15 billion dinars (i.e., ~€510 million). The allocation for higher education includes the budget items Higher and university education (chapter 26.4), Student standard (chapter 26.5), and Criminal police university (chapter 15.1).
The students had every right to demand an increase of 20% of the previously mentioned funds (i.e., an increase of about 12.03 billion dinars, i.e., 102.8 million euros), which would bring the level of investment in higher education closer to the level of investment in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (1.71 % of GDP, according to OECD methodology).
Why has the demand not been fulfilled?
An increase in ""material costs"" by 20% was announced, which would lead to an increase in the total budget in the amount of only 4% (i.e., 22 million euros). ""Material costs"" therefore, mean only the segment of the budget for Higher and university education.
Instead of the requested improvement in the quality of higher education, part of the public was misled that the request was fulfilled.
Explanation of the request
The availability, affordability, and quality of higher education are the standard of a progressive society, and its financing must not be questioned. The state is obliged to provide conditions in which higher education is a choice that is available to everyone, with a quality that is competitive in the world rankings of universities. By shifting the financial burden from students to income from the budget, study conditions at all levels of study would be significantly facilitated, and greater participation of financially vulnerable categories of society in higher education would be enabled.
Therefore, we demand the introduction of new benefits that, after the amendment of the Law on Higher Education, would provide faculties with funds in the amount of 50% of the total value of ESPB points that students would otherwise pay. This would increase allocations for higher education without changing the price of the ESPB point itself (which is determined by the faculties), and students would pay 50% less tuition than the entire amount. We believe that this is the first step towards free education. Furthermore, we demand that the rest of the funds be evenly distributed among other budget items, Student standard and Higher and university education, excluding salaries and other incomes of employees."
