Belgrade Waterfront: Expropriation Deadline Tied to Permit

Serbia’s National Assembly, in its 14th convocation, resumed its tenth special session on Friday, August 28, shortly after 10 a.m., with 101 lawmakers in the chamber chaired by Ana Brnabic. Earlier that same day, lawmakers had wrapped up debate on amendments to the first two items on the agenda, the proposed budget rebalance and a law easing the effects of the energy crisis, before moving to a third item: changes to the Law on Establishing Public Interest and Special Procedures for Expropriation and Building Permit Issuance for the Belgrade Waterfront Project.

The amendments were proposed by the Ministry of Finance. The core change to Article 6 replaces the current seven-year deadline for filing expropriation requests, which has run since the law took effect in April 2015, with a deadline that instead runs until an occupancy permit is issued for every building envisioned under the plan. The ministry’s explanatory note states that expropriation of all real estate within the plan’s boundaries has not yet been completed.

Public consultations on the draft ran from July 28 to August 4, with objections also accepted by mail at Kneza Milosa 20. Part of the rationale for the change is that the project’s spatial plan has been revised three times: the original 2015 version covered 177.27 hectares, and a 2025 revision added roughly 150 hectares, bringing the total to 328.96 hectares.

How much has Belgrade Waterfront cost so far?

First Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Sinisa Mali, speaking during the debate on amendments, laid out a full set of figures on the project for the first time. According to him, 900,000 square meters have been built to date, the investor has put in 2.2 billion euros, and the project’s total value is estimated at 4.4 billion euros. The state, he said, holds a 33 percent stake, worth 1.5 billion euros, while 1.1 billion euros has been collected through taxes. Some 11,000 apartments have been sold and 10,000 jobs created.

“We have changed the economic picture of Belgrade and Serbia,” Mali told the Assembly. Showing photographs of the site before construction began, he added: “A picture is worth a thousand words.”

A day earlier, on August 27, Mali told the same session that more than 90 percent of apartment buyers in the complex are Serbian citizens, and that the Republic of Serbia provides the land for the project while the investor supplies the money.

Opposition amendments

Debate over the budget rebalance, on which the Finance Committee rejected all 166 submitted amendments, also raised questions about how funds are allocated. Lawmaker Verica Milanovic of Serbia Center asked that a billion euros earmarked for the National Stadium be redirected to social welfare institutions, nursing homes, children’s homes and shelters. Radomir Lazovic of the Green-Left Front filed an amendment to redirect the same money toward student welfare, the fire service, flood defense and energy efficiency. His party colleague Bogdan Radovanovic proposed an amendment providing aid to nine local governments affected by pollution from the Duboko landfill.

During the debate, the ruling coalition signaled it would back the budget rebalance when it comes to a vote, describing it as development-oriented and supportive of all segments of the population. The special session, which began on August 24, has 59 items on its agenda in total.

The changes to the Belgrade Waterfront lex specialis followed directly after the budget debate, on the same session in which all 166 budget amendments were rejected. The date of the vote on the Belgrade Waterfront law changes depends on when the Assembly finishes debating the remaining agenda items.