Belgrade Prosecutors Drop Case Against Nine Defendants
The Belgrade Higher Public Prosecutor's Office withdrew its September 2025 indictment motion after evidence gathered through special evidentiary measures was ruled unlawful.
The Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade has told the Higher Court in Belgrade that it is withdrawing its indictment motion against nine defendants charged with preparing acts against Serbia’s constitutional order and security. The decision was announced in a statement on November 9, 2026. The motion was filed on September 19, 2025, more than fourteen months earlier.
The defendants were charged with the offense in connection with the crime of calling for a violent change of the constitutional order, as co-perpetrators. The prosecution identifies them only by initials: L. S., B. B., L. S., I. M., D. S., D. S., D. D., N. P. and L. D. Insajder reports that they are students, an occupation the prosecution’s statement does not mention.
What reason does the prosecution give?
The withdrawal rests on court rulings that excluded evidence. The prosecution explains its step in the statement as follows:
“The Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade has withdrawn the charges in the indictment motion filed on September 19, 2025 against nine defendants for the criminal offense of Preparing Acts Against the Constitutional Order and Security of Serbia in connection with the criminal offense of Calling for a Violent Change of the Constitutional Order, as co-perpetrators, taking into account the court rulings excluding evidence, that is, the lack of grounds for continuing to pursue the indictment motion.”
The decision came after the Court of Appeal in Belgrade upheld a ruling of the Higher Court in Belgrade, the statement says. That ruling excluded as unlawful the evidence obtained through special evidentiary measures. The statement, as carried by Tanjug, does not give the dates of either ruling.
Which evidence was excluded?
The statement describes it only as evidence obtained through special evidentiary measures, but stresses how much weight it carried in the case:
“This decision was made following the ruling of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, which upheld the ruling of the Higher Court in Belgrade excluding as unlawful the evidence obtained through special evidentiary measures, which made up a substantial part of the body of evidence on which the indictment was based.”
Insajder reports that these were secret recordings made by the Security Information Agency (BIA) and that they form the basis of the indictment. That reading comes from the outlet. The prosecution does not name the recordings in its statement.
What is left of the evidence?
After excluding the disputed material, the prosecution reviewed what remained in the case file. Its conclusion is short:
“Having examined the remaining evidence in the case file, the prosecution finds that it no longer has sufficient evidence to support a reasonable suspicion that the defendants committed the criminal offense.”
The statement does not say how or when the Higher Court in Belgrade will act on the notice of withdrawal.
