Prosecutors rule out rape in Mrcajevci school case
The Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Cacak has stated for the first time what its inquiry established after the June 11 incident at the primary school in Mrcajevci.
The Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Cacak said on July 31 that no rape and no abuse of a minor took place at the primary school in Mrcajevci. Prosecutors found that a minor did suffer sexual harassment, but that the act carries none of the elements of rape or of unlawful sexual acts. The incident took place on June 11 at the Tatomir Andjelic primary school.
It was the first time prosecutors stated a conclusion rather than a status update. Until then the public knew only which bodies were working on the file and in what order.
What prosecutors said about the handling
The Cacak Police Department and the duty prosecutor were informed within 24 hours of the incident, the statement says. Work on the case then ran for 72 hours without a break before moving to the regular pace.
Four institutions took part:
- the Police Department in Cacak
- the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Cacak
- the hospital in Cacak
- the Centre for Social Work in Cacak
Sexual harassment is a separate offence under the Serbian Criminal Code and sits below unlawful sexual acts, the charge prosecutors explicitly ruled out here.
What happens at the Higher Court in Cacak?
Prosecutors are preparing a decision and a request to open preparatory proceedings before the Higher Court in Cacak against the minors involved. Their names are not being published.
The legal description in the statement is not the last word. It is the basis prosecutors take to court, and the court decides. Until then none of the minors can be treated as responsible.
Fifty days between the incident and the answer
Fifty days passed between June 11 and July 31. In that gap the case left the walls of one village school. Protests were held, parents demanded guarantees that the school was safe, and the case entered political argument. The prosecution used its statement to point at attempts to exploit the file for political ends.
That gap also explains why the statement reads as a reversal. For the bodies working the file since June, nothing in it is new. It is new for the public, which spent fifty days with second hand descriptions instead of a legal qualification.
The next move belongs to the Higher Court in Cacak. In Mrcajevci the question parents raised back in June stays open, and the statement does not answer it: who is accountable for the safety of children inside the school building, and under which rules, with the new school year now weeks away.
