Former UKP deputy chief arrested over Autokomanda shooting
Belgrade's anti-corruption prosecutors suspect the ex-police official used his influence to make others remove evidence of a November shooting at an Autokomanda restaurant.
- On orders of Belgrade's Special Anti-Corruption Department, a former deputy chief of the Criminal Police Directorate, identified as N. Dj., has been arrested.
- He is suspected of having used his official influence to make other suspects remove evidence and traces of a shooting at an Autokomanda restaurant on November 5, 2025.
- The Interior Ministry's internal control unit ordered him detained for up to 48 hours, after which he faces questioning by a prosecutor.
- In the same case, evidentiary actions are under way against five members of Intervention Unit 92 and the venue's director.
The Special Department for Suppression of Corruption at the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade has ordered the arrest of a former deputy chief of the Criminal Police Directorate. The suspect, publicly identified by the initials N. Dj., was detained on June 23. He is charged with abuse of official position.
According to prosecutors, the suspect used his official influence to make other suspects remove evidence and traces from a restaurant at Autokomanda. The aim of that conduct, investigators believe, was to conceal that the main suspect, Sasa V. known as Boske, had committed crimes of endangering public safety and unlawful possession of a weapon.
The shooting took place on November 5, 2025, at the venue at Autokomanda, in front of numerous guests, using a firearm. Only after more than seven months has the investigation reached the top of the criminal police hierarchy.
What exactly are prosecutors alleging?
According to the details laid out in the case file, the suspect allegedly used his senior position and official influence to effectively cover up the incident at the restaurant. He is accused of leading others to abandon required police procedures and to remove physical traces from the scene, including evidence that would otherwise have been subject to forensic examination.
The Interior Ministry’s internal control sector ordered the suspect held for up to 48 hours. Once that period expires, he will be questioned before the Special Anti-Corruption Department. Until the proceedings conclude and any final verdict is reached, he is presumed innocent under the law.
The arrest is significant because it brings a high-ranking police official into the case for the first time. Until now the proceedings had reached perpetrators and intermediaries of lower rank, and the investigation is now shifting toward those who, it is suspected, had the power to influence how police acted.
Who else is caught up in the shooting probe?
In the same case, evidentiary actions are being carried out against five members of Intervention Unit 92, as well as against the director of the venue where the shooting occurred. Their role, according to the prosecution’s suspicion, is tied to failures in procedure and the removal of traces immediately after the event.
That widens the contours of the investigation in two directions. One covers the immediate handling at the scene, what happened inside and around the restaurant that night. The other concerns command responsibility and the question of whether, and how far, influence from the top of the criminal police shaped what did, or did not, end up in the official files.
The Autokomanda case thus stops being merely a story about a single armed clash. It becomes a test of how deeply institutions can probe their own ranks when an investigation is suspected of being deliberately slowed from within. The prosecution’s next steps will show whether the circle of suspects expands further.
Should investigations that point to involvement by police officers themselves require stricter and faster oversight mechanisms?
