From Goran Pantelić to Aleksandar Dikić, from protest to detention, one of the most serious crimes in the Criminal Code has become a routine qualification in politically sensitive cases
From radical posts on social networks, through protests, to television shows and student gatherings – accusations of “violent overthrow of the constitutional order“in Serbia it is increasingly used as the state’s response to political disobedience.
Although the law foresees this criminal offense for the most serious forms of endangering the state, the practice of recent years shows that it has become one of the most widely used means of arresting activists. students and public critics of the government.
Bizarre cases
In April 2020, when Goran Pantelić, a Valjevac temporary worker abroad, called for an “uprising against the dictator” in front of the Serbian Parliament via social media, it seemed to be another radical but marginal political statement on the Internet.
However, just a few days before the announced gathering, Pantelić was arrested on the border of Austria and Germany, on a warrant from Serbia, for threatening President Aleksandar Vučić and calling for an “uprising”.
“The dictator in question, Aleksandar Vučić, instilled fear, bribed everyone, blackmailed those he could not bribe with threats,” Pantelić said in mid-April. He made calls for the overthrow of the government, insults and threats to Vučić in hundreds of posts on Facebook, Instagram and YouTube since the beginning of April of that year. He wrote that he was “coming from the forest” to “take down” Vučić, saying that he would “beat him until he turns green” or until his “eyes pop out”.
Pantelić then ended up in a Munich prison. A preliminary investigation was conducted against him for endangering the safety of officials and calling for a violent change in the constitutional order. However, the German authorities refused his extradition, judging that the legal qualification of the act did not meet the standards. That case remained one of the first signals that the term “overthrow of the constitutional order” is subject to different interpretations.
From exception to rule
More than three and a half years later, in December 2023, the accusation of overthrowing the constitutional order came into the spotlight again, this time after riots at a protest in front of the Belgrade City Assembly. During the attempt of the opposition list “Serbia against violence” to enter the building and declare victory in the local elections, stones were thrown at the building, and more than 40 people were arrested. A few soon concluded plea agreements with suspended prison terms and fines.
A similar qualification was used during the anti-lithium mining protests, when several people were arrested for allegedly planning violence at a protest scheduled for August 10, 2024.
Precisely from that moment, according to the opinion of lawyers and human rights organizations, the accusation of overthrowing the constitutional order ceases to be an exception and becomes a pattern.
Protests, students and the Criminal Code
During 2025, dozens of cases of arrest and prosecution of people on suspicion of this criminal offense were recorded, almost exclusively in connection with protests. Students, activists, opposition officials and public figures found themselves under the same legal qualification.
The last such case happened on December 24, 2025, when the columnist and author of the show “Bez ostručvanja” on KTV was arrested Aleksandar Dikić. Police detention of up to 48 hours was ordered for him, as stated, for calling for a change in the constitutional arrangement.
After the hearing held on Thursday, December 25, he was released to defend himself, announced the president of the Democratic Party, Srđan Milivojević.
The reason for the arrest, according to previously published information, was Dikić’s statement in which he told the students that their goal was to overthrow the regime and create a system “that will function after Aleksandar Vučić”. In recent days, the regime media reported that Dikić “called for the shooting of Vučić and those who support him”.
The former basketball player Vladimir Štimac, the Novi Sad councilor Miša Bachulov, as well as numerous demonstrators, were also in custody for the same crime. From November 2024 to July 2025, at least 20 people were arrested on suspicion of the violent overthrow of the constitutional order, while that number grew in the meantime. Some have been released, some are still under house arrest on foot, while some activists, like members of STAV, are on the run.
What does the law really say?
Article 309 of the Criminal Code of Serbia stipulates prison sentences of six months to five years for those who “call or incite to forcefully change the constitutional order or overthrow the highest state authorities”, while the penalty increases if the act was committed with help from abroad.
The Constitution of Serbia also prohibits actions aimed at the violent overthrow of the constitutional order.
However, as lawyer Veljko Milić previously explained for Deutsche Welle, the law is interpreted in practice much more broadly than its original purpose.
According to him, such an act would mean that someone is calling for, say, the abolition of the National Assembly, the Government or the installation of a monarch. However, as he explained, arrest under the charge of such a crime has another purpose.
“The biggest problem with that is that actually all these criminal acts against the constitutional system are abused, in order to limit the freedom of expression. In almost all of these cases, there are not even the elements of calling for a change in the constitutional system. We see that some people are accused of planning, say, an attack on Informer, RTS, and so on. These are not constitutional categories, so there can be no violent changes to the constitutional system,” said Milić, one of the defenders of the people arrested during in 2025 on charges of this crime.
Elastic norm, solid message
Precisely in this elasticity lies the reason why “overturning the constitutional order” has become one of the most frequently used criminal offenses in politically sensitive cases. Its severity allows for quick deprivation of liberty, detention or
Such a practice, lawyers warn, not only relativizes the meaning of one of the most serious crimes, but in the long term undermines trust in the judiciary and narrows the space for legitimate political debate.
The text was updated after the release of Aleksandar Dikić
Source: Vreme
