Olenik: Vucic Runs State Terror in the Radic Case

Lawyer Aleksandar Olenik, deputy leader of the League of Social Democrats of Vojvodina, has said that President Aleksandar Vucic is running state terror and abusing part of the prosecution and most of the police to carry it out. He made the accusation over the criminal case against military analyst Aleksandar Radic, who was placed in custody by the Higher Court in Belgrade as part of an investigation into a so-called sonic weapon.

Olenik described the proceedings against Radic as political persecution rather than a case built on evidence. In his view, the facts that should support the charges do not exist, and the case itself serves to pressure and frighten voters ahead of the coming election cycle.

What Radic is charged with

Prosecutors charge Radic with two criminal offenses: preparing acts against the constitutional order and security of Serbia, and disclosing a state secret. These are serious charges that, if proven in court, carry prison terms of several years. For now they remain allegations by the prosecution, and Radic is presumed innocent until proven otherwise by a final verdict.

For years Radic has been one of the most visible military commentators in Serbian media, known for his analysis of weaponry and security matters. It is precisely that public role that has drawn attention far beyond a routine custody hearing, because two questions overlap: the legal one of what he actually did, and the political one of why now.

Olenik also criticized the way the public has been told the details of the investigation. Broadcasting the prosecution’s claims, he said, runs against the presumption of innocence, because the suspect is presented to the public as guilty before anything has been proven.

Do the charges contradict each other?

Olenik’s central legal argument concerns the internal logic of the indictment. In his words, the same person cannot be accused at once of gathering secret data and of spreading false information, because the two claims cancel each other out. If something is secret, it is not a lie; if it is a lie, it is not a secret to be disclosed. On that contradiction the lawyer builds his case that the charges are not legally grounded but politically driven.

He went a step further, asserting that the army has become an instrument of political persecution, and warning that pressure on dissenters will grow as elections near. As a way out, he proposed a vetting of judges, prosecutors and police officers.

On the other side, the case is being run by the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office and the court, which justify custody by the risk of flight and the need for an undisturbed investigation. For the authorities, this is a regular criminal proceeding, not persecution. That gap in interpretation, where one side sees the defense of national security and the other a settling of scores with critics, will sit at the center of Serbia’s political scene in the months before the vote.

The Radic case thus becomes a test of two things at once: how legally sustainable the charges are, and how ready the public is to separate a security question from its political context. Do you believe the court can keep this proceeding clear of the shadow of an election campaign?