Dolovac Orders 24-Hour Deadline for Election Crime Cases

Public prosecutors’ offices in Serbia will have to open a case on a criminal report or submission about crimes against electoral rights within 24 hours. Within 48 hours of the case being assigned, they must begin gathering information or carrying out evidentiary actions and summon the injured party to give a statement. That is what the general binding instruction signed by Supreme Public Prosecutor Zagorka Dolovac says.

Which offenses does the instruction cover?

The instruction covers the offenses in Chapter 15 of the Criminal Code, which deal with electoral rights, as well as other offenses that, judging by the perpetrator’s intent or the way they were committed, can be considered attempted or completed in connection with the electoral rights of adult citizens.

The case is opened by the chief public prosecutor, by the prosecutor designated in the annual work plan, or by the prosecutor on duty. The office can gather information and evidence on its own or through another competent body.

Coordinators, records and reports

Chief public prosecutors of the appellate, higher and basic offices, as well as of the Organized Crime Prosecutor’s Office, must immediately appoint a contact person, meaning a coordinator for these cases, and a deputy if needed. They submit the details to the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office, which keeps an up-to-date register.

The instruction sets out several further obligations:

• prosecutors’ offices must immediately set up separate records of the offenses, the persons involved and the actions taken, and the chief public prosecutor or the coordinator is responsible for their accuracy
• the chief public prosecutor of the regional appellate office must send the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office a consolidated report on the work of lower offices for the previous month by the fifth of each month
• the competent office must inform the public without delay, through its website or in another lawful way, and the notice must state the actions taken and the outcome in each individual case

If the instruction is not followed, the chief public prosecutor must examine the grounds for a disciplinary complaint to the Disciplinary Prosecutor, for a disciplinary offense under Article 114 of the Law on Public Prosecution, and notify the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office.

What else has been said about prosecutors during the election period?

Two prosecutorial bodies also spoke up over a statement by judge Miodrag Majic. Majic, a judge of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade and a member of the Center for Judicial Research, said on October 18 on the program “Utisak nedelje” that the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade had organized duty rosters for election day.

“The Belgrade Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office has organized special duty rosters for election day, that is, for October 25, 26 and 27, with Nenad Stefanovic’s vetted personnel. That means some kind of preparation exists inside the prosecution, that they probably expect some unrest or an excessive number of detentions. To all those who have not distinguished themselves by courage so far, I appeal to be on the right side at this historically decisive moment,” Majic said.

In a statement, the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade says this is not true. According to the office, it and all basic public prosecutor’s offices in its territory will have, “as during all previous elections,” reinforced duty rosters from October 25 to November 5, 2026. That means round-the-clock duty by two to three public prosecutors from that office and from each of the six basic public prosecutor’s offices, so that reports of offenses related to electoral rights, offenses against public order and peace, violent behavior and other offenses prosecuted ex officio can be handled in a timely way.

The prosecutor’s office said in the same statement that Majic had made a series of other claims about colleagues in the judiciary, which, it argued, should prompt the judicial councils to react urgently. It urged citizens to refrain from punishable conduct and violence on election day and afterward, and stated:

“Peaceful gatherings of citizens are permitted if they are held in accordance with the Constitution and the law and if their conduct does not endanger the safety of other citizens, property, public traffic and state institutions. Every violation of the law will be prosecuted.”

How did the High Prosecutorial Council respond?

On October 20, the High Prosecutorial Council replied to an inquiry from the portal Nova.rs about Majic’s statement. The Council said the information did not arise in its work or in connection with it.

“Pursuant to Article 2, paragraph 1 of the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance, we inform you that the question concerning the statement of Miodrag Majic, judge of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, on the program ‘Utisak nedelje’, is not information that arose in the work or in connection with the work of the High Prosecutorial Council, nor is it contained in any specific document held by the Council. Bearing in mind the said legal provision, the High Prosecutorial Council has no legal possibility to comment on the statement of judge Majic,” the Council’s reply says.

The dispute over who is right remains between the judge and the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office, because the Council neither confirmed nor denied either side. The Supreme Public Prosecutor’s instruction applies to all prosecutors’ offices and sets a deadline for opening cases, an appointed coordinator and public notice of the outcome of every case.