Senjak Case: Vukovic Indicted, Milic Left Out
Belgrade prosecutors have indicted Sasa Vukovic for the Senjak restaurant murder, but former police chief Veselin Milic was kept out of the charges.
- The Higher Public Prosecutor's Office in Belgrade filed an indictment on July 10 against Sasa Vukovic for the aggravated murder of Aleksandar Nesovic at a restaurant on Senjak.
- The indictment names five more people, including the restaurant owner, for aiding the perpetrator and concealing evidence.
- Former Belgrade police chief Veselin Milic was left out, as were three Protection Unit officers whose charges were dropped on June 3.
- The case has already brought down the head of the police and become a heated political dispute.
The Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade filed an indictment on July 10 against Sasa Vukovic, on reasonable suspicion that on May 12 this year he unlawfully took the life of Aleksandar Nesovic at Restaurant 27 on Senjak. Vukovic is charged with aggravated murder in concurrence with the unlawful production, possession and carrying of weapons and explosive materials, formalizing the main suspect after two months of investigation in one of the most sensitive cases of the year.
The indictment does not target Vukovic alone. Alongside him, five more people are named, including the owner of the restaurant, accused of aiding the perpetrator after the crime and concealing evidence. According to the prosecution, they helped Vukovic avoid detection by removing traces from the place where Nesovic was last seen.
Who was left out of the indictment
What made this case politically explosive is not what the indictment contains, but what it omits. The document leaves out Veselin Milic, the former Belgrade police chief, along with three Protection Unit officers whose charges were already dropped on June 3. For part of the public, this is the decisive twist: the man whose name had been tied for months to the events around the Senjak restaurant remains beyond the reach of prosecutors.
The prosecution justified its decision on factual grounds. The Higher Prosecutor’s Office stated there is no evidence that Milic ever spoke with Nesovic, nor that he was in the restaurant when Nesovic was killed. With that, earlier suspicions concerning obstruction of the investigation were formally dismissed.
The opposition and part of the legal community see selectivity in this. They recall that the case has already brought down the head of the Serbian police and that Milic’s name is linked to several disputed matters, so they view the omission of the former chief as political cover rather than the outcome of an orderly evidentiary process. On the other side, officials and prosecutors insist that the indictment follows the evidence, not public pressure, and that responsibility is established before a court, not in media reconstructions.
Does the indictment close or open questions?
Filing an indictment is usually the moment when the fog around a case lifts. Here the effect is the opposite. The document is precise about Vukovic and the five co-defendants, but around Milic’s name it leaves a space that the opposition will keep filling with its readings and the government with its own. The next step lies with the court, which still has to confirm the indictment and schedule the main hearing.
For now, all that is clear is who stands before the court, not whether the investigation went all the way. A matter that began as a criminal case long ago became a political one, and a verdict, whenever it arrives, is unlikely to settle the argument over who was left out of the charges and why. Do you believe the trial will answer the question the prosecution is, for now, avoiding?
