Brnabic Removes Two Opposition MPs Over Travel Claims
Parliament Speaker Ana Brnabic barred Milos Parandilovic and Dragan Ninkovic for 20 days, alleging they misused ID cards to claim travel expenses. The opposition rejects the accusations.
- Parliament Speaker Ana Brnabic removed Milos Parandilovic and Dragan Ninkovic (Novo Lice Srbije) from sessions for 20 days.
- Brnabic says Parandilovic was not in the chamber on June 17, yet claimed travel expenses of 15,000 dinars.
- Their parliamentary group and the opposition dispute the accusations and have backed Parandilovic.
- The extraordinary session on judicial law changes resumes on June 24.
Speaker of the Serbian National Assembly Ana Brnabic on June 23 imposed a removal measure on MPs Milos Parandilovic and Dragan Ninkovic of the Novo Lice Srbije group, alleging that they misused identification cards so that Parandilovic could be reimbursed for travel to a session he did not attend. The measure applies for the next 20 days of sessions, or until the end of the sitting if it runs longer.
According to the Speaker, Parandilovic was not in the building of the National Assembly on June 17, yet he nonetheless requested travel expenses amounting to 15,000 dinars. Brnabic said that his identification card was that day in his seating unit, numbered 230, even though he was not seated in the hall. In the adjacent unit, number 229, sat Ninkovic with his own card, which the Speaker interprets as a joint attempt to bill Parandilovic for costs he did not incur.
In the days around the session, Parandilovic sent letters that, it was noted, contained contradictory claims, one on June 17 and another on June 19. The Novo Lice Srbije group and part of the opposition reject this reading and have publicly backed their MP, calling the measure politically motivated. Their final position and any challenge to the decision remain open while the sitting continues.
What exactly does the Speaker accuse the MPs of?
The core of the accusation is that an MP was not physically present at a session for which he sought reimbursement of travel costs, while a second MP allegedly used his own card to help carry out that claim. Identification cards in the chamber serve to record attendance and voting, so their use on someone else’s behalf, if confirmed, raises questions not only about travel expenses but also about the validity of attendance records. Brnabic supported her claim by pointing to the layout of units 229 and 230 and to the contents of the letters Parandilovic sent.
For its part, the parliamentary group rejects this account of events and is asking for the measure to be reviewed. In the Serbian parliament a removal measure is a recognized disciplinary tool, but one rarely imposed for as long as 20 days, so its duration and reasoning are likely to sit at the center of the dispute in the days ahead.
What is the political backdrop to this decision?
The measure was imposed amid an extraordinary session that began on June 17, focused on amendments to a set of judicial laws, the so-called Mrdic laws. The session resumes on June 24, placing the removal within the tense atmosphere of the judicial reform debate. Milenko Jovanov, head of the Serbian Progressive Party group, told the opposition it would answer for what he called lies and an attempted coup, raising the temperature further.
For the governing side, the travel expenses case is an opportunity to pin a misuse of parliamentary privileges on the opposition, while the opposition presents it as a tool of pressure in the middle of a crucial judicial debate. Both sides thereby turn a dispute over 15,000 dinars into a wider political clash, the outcome of which depends on whether the measure is challenged and how the debate on the judicial laws unfolds after June 24.
Should a disciplinary measure of this scale rest in the hands of the Speaker, or should it be decided by a body kept outside the daily political fight?
