Complaint Against Sapic Dropped, Djilas Weighs Private Suit

A criminal complaint against Belgrade Mayor Aleksandar Sapic has been dropped. The decision was announced on August 2 by the Party of Freedom and Justice (SSP), whose leader Dragan Djilas had filed the complaint, claiming Sapic threatened him in messages sent over WhatsApp.

Prosecutor Marija Nikolic found no elements of a threat in the disputed words. Along with the dismissal, SSP says, Djilas was told he can pursue the mayor through a private lawsuit instead, on a charge of insult.

The party published the words the complaint was based on in full:

For this I will personally fk you up, one by one. I swear on my life that because of this, once I get through all of it, I will fk you up, one by one. I will find you myself when you least expect it.

According to the same statement, the messages were sent privately, and Sapic repeated them publicly a few days ago, at a press conference. That detail matters more than it might seem: words spoken on camera are not the same, legally, as a message in a private exchange between two people.

Why insult, not threat?

The difference is not in how harsh the words are, but in who runs the case. An offense that endangers someone’s safety is prosecuted by the state, on its own initiative, meaning prosecutors gather the evidence and bring the charge. Insult is prosecuted through a private lawsuit, meaning the injured party has to open the case at a basic court, run it themselves, and cover the costs if they lose.

Dropping the complaint is therefore not just a legal classification. It shifts the burden from the prosecution onto Djilas personally, and turns a dispute between an opposition party leader and the mayor of Belgrade into a private lawsuit between two citizens.

There is also a procedural path SSP has not announced yet. A complainant who believes a case was dismissed without grounds has the right to file an objection directly with the next higher public prosecutor, who can either uphold the dismissal or order the case reopened. Whether Djilas will use that option is not clear from the statement.

What the Party of Freedom and Justice wants

SSP called the reasoning behind the decision senseless and asked the prosecutor how the words in question are not a threat, and what happens if Sapic, as the party put it in its statement, actually “finds Djilas.” In the same statement, the party raised two other cases it says remain unanswered.

We also take this opportunity to ask her and her boss, Nenad Stefanovic, what happened to the complaint against Luka Petrovic and the group of hooligans who attacked Dragan Djilas and Djordje Aleksic on the street, knocked them to the ground and kicked them, for which video evidence exists. What happened to identifying the thugs who came out of the SNS premises on Kneza Milosa Street and beat Pedja Mitrovic, a member of parliament for the Party of Freedom and Justice, over the head with a baton.

By the party’s own count, that puts three separate cases on the prosecution’s desk, which it treats as connected:

• the messages Sapic sent to Djilas, complaint dismissed
• the street attack on Djilas and Djordje Aleksic, complaint against Luka Petrovic and a group of supporters
• the head injury of MP Pedja Mitrovic, the attackers not identified

The message SSP is sending is aimed not at Sapic but at the prosecution, a shift in tone from the day the complaint was filed.

A decision known only from one side’s account

A caveat is needed here. Everything known about the decision comes from the statement of the party that filed the complaint. The prosecution has not made its reasoning public, so it is not known exactly how it was worded, what evidence it was based on, or whether Sapic was even questioned in the case.

The mayor has not commented on the dismissal either, even though the decision favors him. His position on the messages themselves is known only from his remarks at the press conference, which SSP interprets as a repeat of the threats.

Three questions remain unanswered, then, on equal footing: the prosecutor’s full reasoning, the fate of an objection if one is filed, and whether Djilas will actually file a private lawsuit. The deadline for a private lawsuit is not unlimited, it runs from when the offense and the offender become known, so the answer to that last question should come soon, and it will come from a court, not a press release.