This week, the Assembly passed the Law on the Use of the Serbian Language in Public Life and the Protection and Preservation of the Cyrillic Script. On the same day, the same law was passed in Republika Srpska, and the Minister of Culture, Maja Gojković, did not hide that the law was passed because of the expression of unity, and also because the President Aleksandar Vučić promised so. Although almost all MPs belong to the ruling majority, at this session we found out that they did not perceive every topic in the same way. Or perhaps they were on a different mission.

“Let me start by quoting Isidora Sekulić who said that “Language protects nations, not science. Science is the servant, language is the master.”

“Karadžić claims and I quote “All Shtokavians are Serbs, and all Serbs are Shtokavians.” End of quote. This thesis about the Serbian ethno-linguistic identity was confirmed by many Serb Catholics, as well as Serb Muslims, among them by two great Serbian writers, Ivo Andrić and Meša Selimović.”

“My colleague mentioned Meša Selimović, about whom many are arguing, and I know of a situation when Alija Isaković replied to the remark that he was one of the greatest Serbian writers by saying – if so, then the greatest Serbian novel begins with: “Bismillahi Rahmani Rahim”, “in the name of God, the merciful and compassionate”, therefore, a Quranic quote. I want to say that everything is permeated in the Balkans.”

“The famous Irish writer George Bernard Shaw, the only person in history to win both the Nobel Prize and the Oscar, considered Serbian Cyrillic the most perfect alphabet in the world.”

“Today, the Cyrillic alphabet, calm, quiet, as it is in its essence, lithe, tender as a flower, playful as a kolo [dance], warbling as a song, sad as music, endearing as a doe, but above all persistent, has opened the door to its better and more beautiful future.”

“It is difficult, ladies and gentlemen, to assess exactly where the stronger attacks and heavier accusations come from, whether from Podgorica, where Milo Đukanović compares Vučić with, believe it or not, Hitler, and says that Metropolitan Joanikije is a bloody metropolitan or, on the other hand, from Sarajevo, Zagreb, Priština”.

“Let's not forget that all our neighbours, who keep blowing their own trumpets and make these anti-Serbian statements, are in fact descendants of those who were faithful servants of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, especially excelling in keeping the hygiene of Austro-Hungarian barns.”

“President Aleksandar Vučić and we, members of the SNS, are the heirs of that glorious Serbian army, the only army in the world whose war flag did not fall into the hands of the enemy during the great war.”

If you have not understood what this Law is about, you only have yourselves to blame.

For the Open Parliament, Mirjana Nikolić.

Ove nedelje skupština je donela zakon o upotrebi  srpskog jezika i ćiriličnog pisma. Istog dana isti zakon donet je i u Republici Srpskoj, a ministarka kulture Maja Gojković nije krila da se zakon i donosi zbog iskazivanja jedinstva, ali i zato što je tako obećao predsednik Aleksandar Vučić. Iako skoro svi poslanici pripadaju vladajućoj većini, ova sednica je razotkrila da oni nipošto ne doživljavaju svaku temu na isti način. Ili imaju različite zadatke.

“Ja ću početi citatom Isidore Sekulić koja kaže: „Jezik čuva narode, a ne nauka. Nauka je sluškinja, jezik je gospodar“.“

“Karadžićeva tvrdnja je, citiram: „Svi Štokavci su Srbi, a svi Srbi Štokavci“. Završen citat. Ovu tezu o srpsko etno jezičkom identitetu potvrdili su mnogi Srbi katolici, a i Srbi muslimani, među njima i dvojca srpskih književnika velika, Ivo Andrić i Meša Selimović.”

“Kolega je spominjao Mešu Selimovića, oko koga se mnogi spore, a ja znam za jednu situaciju kada je na ovu opasku da je jedan od najvećih srpskih pisaca, Alija Isaković odgovarao – ako je tako, onda najveći srpski roman počinje sa: „Bismillahi Rahmani Rahim“, „U ime Boga milostivoga samilosnoga“, dakle, kuranskim citatom. Hoću reći da je sve prožeto na Balkanu.”

“Slavni irski pisac Džordž Bernard Šo, jedina osoba u istoriji koja je dobila Nobelovu nagradu i nagradu Oskar, smatrao je srpsku ćirilicu najsavršenijim pismom na svetu.”

“Danas je ćirilica mirna, tiha, onakva u suštini jeste, tanana, nežna kao cvet, kao kolo razigrana, kao pesma raspevana, setna kao muzika, kao srna umiljata, ali iznad svega uporna otškrinula vrata svoje bolje i lepše budućnosti”

“Teško je, dame i gospodo, proceniti tačno odakle stižu jači napadi i teže optužbe, da li iz Podgorice, odakle Milo Đukanović upoređuje Vučića sa, verovali ili ne, Hitlerom, a za mitropolita Joanikija kaže da je krvavi mitropolit ili s druge strane, iz Sarajeva, Zagreba, Prištine “.

“Da ne zaboravimo da su sve te naše komšije, koji se uporno busaju i idu sa tim antisrpskim izjavama, zapravo potomci onih koji su bili verni služioci austrougarske monarhije, istakli se posebno u držanju higijene austrougarskih štala.”

“Predsednik Aleksandar Vučić i mi članovi SNS, mi smo naslednici one slavne srpske vojske, jedine vojske na svetu čija ni jedna ratna zastava tokom velikog rata nije pala u ruke neprijatelja”.

Ako niste shvatili o čemu je ovaj zakon, mora da je do vas.

Za Otvoreni parlament Mirjana Nikolić.

Predsednik Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije Ivica Dačić sazvao je, na zahtev 236 narodnih poslanika, Četrnaesto vanredno zasedanje Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije u Dvanaestom sazivu za utorak, 21. septembar 2021. godine, sa početkom u 10.00 časova.

Whether the sitting is extraordinary or regular, whether the Law on Consumer Protection or the election of the vice-governor of the National Bank is on the agenda, the laws can only be discussed about in the Serbian Parliament before noon. In the afternoon, the topic is always the same.

“Harmonise, define yourselves, but even if you try to unite, you cannot win against what is easily visible, and that is the policy of Aleksandar Vučić, the progress of Serbia and the prosperity of all citizens of Serbia.“

“You’re offering the past, we’re offering the future that builds, creates security, peace and stability. The future of this country is to have more babies and that is the goal of this Government headed by the President Aleksandar Vučić.“

“Every day, Aleksandar Vučić lives and works for Serbia and a better life for the citizens of Serbia. The people see and know that, and that is why the policy of Aleksandar Vučić has no alternative.“

“I can freely say that we prevented it, that Aleksandar Vučić prevented the brain drain“.

“The people of Serbia see it best, just as they see roads, bridges, factories, hospitals, kindergartens, salary and pension increases and everything that has been a dream for the last 140 years, and is now becoming a reality, thanks to the lion fight of Aleksandar Vučić, who does not kneel before phoneys and does not allow foreign embassies and mercenaries to run Serbia.“

“Before Aleksandar Vučić, there were no jobs, no salaries, no future for Serbia.“

And not only are the MPs enthusiastic, but also the governor of the National Bank. She not only pointed out that the support of President Aleksandar Vučić is crucial for the good work of that institution, but also explained how she consulted with him when she introduced the compulsory DINA payment card in Serbia.

“Even then, I asked the one who is for me, who not only proposed me to this Assembly, but […] who is for me a man who, in terms of courage and [his] non calculating [nature], cannot be compared to any of the former presidents. I will share something personal with you: I often say 'Aleksandar, are these people worthy of you?'”

For the Open Parliament, Mirjana Nikolić

Bilo da je zasedanje vanredno ili redovno, bilo da je na dnevom redu Zakon o zaštiti potrošača ili izbor viceguvernera narodne banke, u Skupštini Srbije pre podne još i bude reči o zakonima. Posle podne tema je uvek ista.

„Uskladite se, definišite se, ali svakako i da pokušate da se ujedinite, ne možete da pobedite ono što je lako vidljivo, a to je politika Aleksandra Vučića, napredak Srbije i prosperitet svih građana Srbije.“

„Vi nudite prošlost, mi nudimo budućnost koja gradi, stvara sigurnost, mir i stabilnost. Budućnost ove zemlje je da se rađa više beba i to je cilj ove Vlade na čelu sa predsednikom Aleksandrom Vučićem.“

„Aleksandar Vučić svakog dana živi i radi za Srbiju i bolji život građana Srbije. To narod, takođe, vidi i zna i zato politika Aleksandra Vučića nema alternativu.“

„Slobodno mogu da kažem da smo mi sprečili, da je Aleksandar Vučić sprečio odliv mozgova u inostranstvo.“

„Narod Srbije to najbolje vidi, baš kao što vidi i puteve, mostove, fabrike, bolnice, vrtiće, povećanje plata i penzija i sve ono što je poslednjih 140 godina bio samo san, a sada postaje java, zahvaljujući lavovskoj borbi Aleksandra Vučića, koji ne želi da poklekne pred hohštaplerima i ne dozvoljava da Srbijom upravljaju strane ambasade i plaćenici.“

„Pre Aleksandra Vučića nije postojalo ni radnih mesta, ni plata, ni budućnosti Srbije.“

I nisu samo poslanici oduševljeni, već i guvernerka Narode banke. Ona ne samo što je istakla da je za dobar rad te institucije presudna podrška predsednika Aleksandra Vučića, nego je i objasnila kako se sa njim konsultovala kada je u Srbiju uvela obaveznu Dina platnu karticu.

 „Ja sam i tada pitala onog ko je za mene, ne samo da me je predložio ovoj skupštini, nego onog ko je za mene čovek koji se po hrabrosti i neproračunatosti ne može uporediti ni sa kim kao predsednicima do sada, evo izneću jedni ličnu stvar, ja često puta kažem ‘Aleksandre, da li te je dostojan ovaj narod?'“

Za Otvoreni parlament, Mirjana Nikolić.

Predsednik Narodne skupštine Ivica Dačić sazvao je, na zahtev Vlade, Dvanaesto vanredno zasedanje Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije u Dvanaestom sazivu, za petak, 10. septembar 2021. godine, sa početkom u 10.00 časova.

Predsednik Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije Ivica Dačić sazvao je Četrdesetprvi redovni sastanak Kolegijuma Narodne skupštine Dvanaestog saziva za utorak, 7. septembar 2021. godine, sa početkom u 9.00 časova.

Predsednik Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije Ivica Dačić sazvao je Trinaesto vanredno zasedanje Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije u Dvanaestom sazivu za ponedeljak, 13. septembar 2021. godine, sa početkom u 10.00 časova.

Predsednik Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije Ivica Dačića sazvao je Jedanaesto vanredno zasedanje Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije u Dvanaestom sazivu za utorak, 7. septembar 2021. godine, sa početkom u 10.00 časova.

Dnevni red sednice određen je u zahtevu 237 narodnih poslanika:

1. Predlog zakona o zaštiti potrošača, koji je podnela Vlada;

2. Predlog zakona o potvrđivanju Sporazuma između Vlade Republike Srbije i Vlade Kraljevine Maroko o saradnji u oblasti odbrane, koji je podnela Vlada;

3. Predlog zakona o potvrđivanju Sporazuma između Vlade Republike Srbije i Vlade Ruske Federacije o osnivanju i uslovima delatnosti kulturno-informativnih centara, koji je podnela Vlada;

4. Predlog zakona o potvrđivanju Okvirnog sporazuma o zajmu LD 2070 (2020) između Banke za razvoj Saveta Evrope i Republike Srbije za projektni zajam - Studentsko stanovanje, koji je podnela Vlada;

5. Predlog zakona o potvrđivanju Amandmana na Montrealski protokol o supstancama koje oštećuju ozonski omotač, koji je podnela Vlada;

6. Predlog zakona o potvrđivanju Sporazuma između Vlade Republike Srbije i Vlade Savezne Republike Nemačke o saradnji u oblasti odbrane, koji je podnela Vlada;

7. Predlog zakona o potvrđivanju Sporazuma između Vlade Republike Srbije i Kabineta ministara Ukrajine o izmenama Sporazuma između Vlade Republike Srbije i Kabineta ministara Ukrajine o ukidanju viza za njihove državljane, koji je podnela Vlada;

8. Predlog odluke o izboru viceguvernera Narodne banke Srbije, koji je podnela guverner Narodne banke Srbije;

9. Predlog odluke o izmenama Odluke o izboru članova i zamenika članova odbora Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije, koji je podnela Poslanička grupa „Aleksandar Vučić - za našu decu“ i

10. Predlog odluke o izmenama Odluke o izboru članova i zamenika članova odbora Narodne skupštine Republike Srbije, koji je podnela Poslanička grupa „Aleksandar Vučić - za našu decu“.

Sednica će biti održana u Domu Narodne skupštine, Trg Nikole Pašića 13.

Since the adoption of the Constitution in 2006, the need for constitutional revision was discussed. There was even a popular initiative on the subject. Given that the country is on the European integration path, the harmonization of national law with the acquis communautaire requires, among other things, a reform in the field of justice. Hence, on December 4th 2020 the Serbian Government submitted a Constitutional Amendment Proposal, which refers to the regulation of the judiciary and the constitutional provisions in that regard.

On May 6th 2021, the Committee on Constitutional Issues and Legislation determined that the proposal was submitted by an authorized proposer. Except by the Government, this proposal can be submitted by 150,000 citizens, one third of MPs and the President of the Republic. The constitutional amendment proposal was presented to the National Assembly on June 7th, which decided with a two-thirds majority to proceed with the change of the Constitution. This is the first phase in the constitutional revision procedure, because the Constitutional Amendment Act is yet to be considered, adopted and drafted. The Government's proposal should be distinguished from the Constitutional Amendment Act because the latter is based on that proposal and precisely formulates the amendment subject. This act is drafted by the Committee on Constitutional Issues and Legislation. However, on this occasion, the Committee formed a Work Group to draft it. At its first meeting, the Work Group stated that they will go beyond the Government’s proposal and consider the conclusions made at the public hearings held by the Committee after the constitutional revision procedure began. The expert public took a critical stance on judicial reform solutions even during the preparation of the Government's proposal, so it is to be expected that the Work Group will take these opinions into account as well.

The question may arise here as to whether the public hearings, organized after the initiation of the procedure, are sufficient to meet the objectives of the public debate on the constitutional revision. Although the importance of public hearings should not be diminished, a public hearing will fulfill its purpose only if citizens and the expert public are given the opportunity to express their views on the act they’re supposed to decide on. Hence, the public debate should be organized after the Assembly Committee drafts the Constitutional Amendment Act. During the same phase, this act should be sent to the Venice Commission, for expert evaluation. Although there was talk that the Venice Commission was aware of the content during the preparation of the Government's proposal to change the Constitution (that is, that it noted the proposal), the fact is that the Constitutional Amendment Act that citizens will decide on was not officially considered by this advisory body. Moreover, the Government's proposal and the Constitutional Amendment Act do not necessarily have to coincide. The National Assembly does decide on the change of those constitutional provisions initiated by the proposer, but as the Assembly is the holder of the constitutional power, it can draft the act independently.

After the completion of all the aforementioned actions, the National Assembly will discuss in the plenum and make a decision on the Constitutional Amendment Act by a two-thirds majority of all MPs. However, the constitutional revision procedure does not end here. The provisions in question regulate government organization and therefore must be put to a constitutional referendum.

The constitutional referendum is regulated in a relaxed manner. The reason for that can be found in the revision procedure of the previous Constitution (1990), which could be changed in a referendum only by a majority of half of all citizens registered to vote. This rigid condition led to the referendum for the adoption of the Constitution in 2006 lasting two days in order to secure the necessary referendum majority. From the very beginning, cracks were starting to show in the legitimacy foundation of the highest general legal act of the first independent Republic. It is not common for a referendum to last more than one day - especially in a country with a relatively small number of voters and a territory that does not require special technical conditions for voting stages.

In order to prevent the difficulties caused by the rigid procedure of the previous Constitution, the new Constitution (2006) not only reduced the referendum majority, but also omitted the so-called referendum quorum. The decision on the constitutional amendment is made by the majority of citizens who vote for the amending act, regardless of the number of voters that went to the referendum. Therefore, in the national law of Serbia, the constitutional referendum will be legally valid even if the majority of registered voters do not participate, which raises the question of the legitimacy of the highest general legal act in case of low turnout. In the formal sense, for a positive referendum decision, it is enough to get a larger number of votes that support the Amendment Act compared to those who voted against. The decision will be made regardless of the size of the majority in relation to the total number of citizens with the right to vote (for example, one half or one quarter of the registered voters is not required).

Given this constitutional rule, citizens should be active in the referendum process. For those who do not agree with the amendments, it is not enough to abstain and not respond to the referendum call. When there is no mandatory turnout threshold for a referendum to be successful, it is pivotal for citizens to express their views with an explicit answer if they oppose a constitutional revision.

It remains to be seen how big the turnout will be and how will that affect the legitimacy of the Constitutional Amendment Act. The short Serbian constitutional history since introducing the multi-party system in the nineties is filled with constitutional acts that were disputed because of lack of legitimacy. Such was the case of the 1990 Constitution of Serbia adopted by the socialist Assembly just before the first multi-party elections were held, then the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1992, adopted by the Federal Assembly of the socialist Federation without quorum because the delegations of self-proclaimed republics have previously withdrawn from it, all to the current Constitution adopted in 2006 without a public hearing on a referendum that lasted for two days.

Irena Pejić, phd

Tenured professor at Faculty of Law, University of Niš