Attorneys Vladimir Beljanski and Srđan Hromiš, from Novi Sad, together with the Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, hereby inform the public that on 3 November 2025, they submitted an application to the European Court of Human Rights against the Republic of Serbia, on behalf of two university students who, in the early morning hours of 28 January 2025, were victims of severe physical violence perpetrated by four activists of the Serbian Progressive Party in Novi Sad, alleging a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment).
It should be recalled that criminal proceedings had been initiated against the four activists of the Serbian Progressive Party on suspicion of having committed offences involving violence — violent behaviour and serious bodily injury — on the aforementioned date. Although the incident caused considerable public outrage across Serbia and led to the resignations of the then Prime Minister and Mayor of Novi Sad, the criminal liability of the four accused was never established, as they were pardoned by decision of the President of the Republic, upon the proposal of the Minister of Justice, thereby being released from criminal responsibility.
According to the longstanding and well-established case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, granting amnesties or pardons to individuals accused or convicted of serious human rights violations or violent crimes is incompatible with the obligations arising under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Although the legal representatives of the injured students submitted constitutional complaints to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Serbia three months ago, challenging the pardons granted to the four accused, the application submitted yesterday to the European Court of Human Rights sets out numerous reasons and arguments — grounded in the jurisprudence and the established practice of the Constitutional Court — demonstrating that, in cases of this nature, a constitutional complaint cannot be considered an effective domestic remedy that must be exhausted prior to seising the Strasbourg Court.
