Introduction
Since late last year, Serbia has been gripped by a wave of protests, demonstrations, and blockades, challenging the tight control that President Aleksandar Vučić has maintained over the country. What began as vigils to honor the victims of a tragic incident soon escalated into a powerful movement demanding accountability and reform.
The turning point came on November 1, when the canopy of the Novi Sad railway station collapsed, an event that shocked the nation and raised serious concerns about negligence and corruption in public infrastructure projects. What started as an expression of mourning quickly transformed into mass mobilizations.
At the forefront of these protests, students have articulated four key demands:
- Full transparency—releasing all documents related to the station’s renovation to determine potential misconduct or negligence.
- Accountability for police violence, particularly against protesters.
- The release of detained demonstrators and the dismissal of charges against them.
- A 20% increase in funding for higher education to improve academic quality and university conditions.
Against this backdrop, three law students—Isadora, Vladan, and Aleksandra—have shared their perspectives on student mobilization, systemic failures, the role of the media, and their hopes for the future with Dialektika.
This interview provides an inside look at their motivations, challenges, and the broader significance of the protests—offering a firsthand account of a critical moment in Serbia’s history.
The Role of Media and Information
Interviewer: In today’s information age, access to credible news sources is crucial, especially in politically charged environments. Given Serbia’s media landscape, how do you stay informed? Which sources do you trust, and how do you verify information before sharing it?
Isidora: Certainly not from RTS (Serbian public television). Honestly, I think one reason why young people have been so successful in this movement is that now we’re using media to our advantage.
I think we’re really just communicating among ourselves, and until we get reliable information, we don’t want to spread it too much because it’s known to create unnecessary panic.
But whenever we get a truly credible source of information, that’s when we start sharing it among ourselves.
Vladan: When the demonstrations started, the government financed bots online to spread their messages. That made us pessimistic about the situation—we thought they had more people supporting them than they actually did.
We later found documents from a couple of years ago showing that around 14,000 people were operating bots online for the government, and they were being paid for it.
Interviewer: That’s concerning. Beyond social media, do you have more structured communication channels? Are there specific platforms or messaging apps that students use to coordinate and ensure reliable information circulates among the movement?
Vladan: Most students are connected through faculty-based chats, and we also have working groups for broader coordination. We exchange updates directly—just walk into the faculty, and you’ll hear everything you need to know.
Interviewer: Do these networks extend beyond your faculty? Is there an effort to unify students from different universities and academic institutions to create a more significant, cohesive movement?
Vladan: Yes, we have a working group dedicated to interfaculty communication. The group coordinates with professors, other student organizations, and representatives from different universities.
They meet every day at the Rectorate, and we have a dedicated team that attends those meetings on behalf of the movement.
It’s better to argue, to express ourselves, than to stay silent and let things deteriorate
Decision-Making and Organization
Interviewer: You mentioned plenums as the central space for decision-making. Can you explain how they function and what role they play in structuring the movement?
Vladan: The plenums are held in the faculty theater, and that’s where we gather to discuss and make decisions. At the end of each session, we elect a new moderator by raising hands. People volunteer for the role, and we choose based on who seems most capable of handling the discussion. It’s not an easy job, so we try to be thoughtful about who takes on that responsibility.
Interviewer: And these discussions—how structured are they? Is there an agenda that participants follow?
Vladan: Yes, we always have an agenda. The moderators present the topics at the beginning, and then we go through them one by one. The debates can get heated. Last time, it almost turned into a fight—everyone was frustrated, everyone wanted to act, and it’s complicated. But honestly, it’s better to argue, to express ourselves, than to stay silent and let things deteriorate.
Interviewer: Can any student participate, or is there a specific process for getting involved?
Vladan: Any law student can walk in, listen, and participate. There’s no formal membership. If you want to be involved, you just show up.
Isidora: One of the things that makes the plenums effective is transparency. The recording secretary keeps a document open, and it’s projected onto a screen during the meeting so that everyone can follow along. This way, there’s no confusion about what has been discussed or decided.
Aleksandra: Yes, and we also keep records of everything. These documents are available for students, so they can review them before each assembly and stay informed about what’s happening.
Interviewer: Was this system in place before the protests, or did it emerge as a response to the mobilization?
Vladan: We had a debate club before, but it was nothing like this. The plenums and working groups formed out of necessity. The scale of these protests required a more structured way of organizing ourselves. Now, some faculties hold plenums every day, while others do them every two days, depending on the urgency of the situation.
Interviewer: Besides the plenums, do you have smaller working groups focused on specific tasks, like logistics, outreach, or legal support?
Vladan: Yes, we have different groups for media, security, faculty coordination, and more. There’s also a group responsible for maintaining communication between faculties and organizing joint actions. Everything is structured so that people contribute where they’re most effective.
The reason why we’re trying to change the whole system, and not just the government, is because the problem isn’t just the government itself—it’s also the media
The Impact of Social Media and Government-Controlled Media
Interviewer: Would you say social media plays a crucial role in this movement?
Vladan: Absolutely. But it also exposes the failures of traditional media. If television and radio were doing their jobs objectively, we wouldn’t need to rely on social media for accurate information.
Isidora: I mentioned earlier that we don’t trust RTS. They don’t cover what’s happening honestly.
Vladan: For example, some of the biggest demonstrations took place right in front of RTS. Even my mother, who had never protested in her 55 years, attended one. She saw me on TV calling for people to come out, and she actually showed up. That tells you something—people are realizing they have to act.
Interviewer: How would you describe the role of mainstream media in Serbia today?
Vladan:I’ll try to be as objective as possible. There are basically two sides.
On one side, you have around dozens of newspapers and television channels. On the other side, you have two million people, but only one major independent newspaper—as far as I know. I don’t really read it much, but okay, let’s say there’s one big one. So, from the very beginning, you can see that this is not a fair fight.
Now, all the government-funded TV stations have national broadcasting frequencies, which means that in smaller towns, where only about 100 people live, those are the only channels they can see. The independent TV channels, on the other hand, can only be accessed if you pay for a specific provider.
As for other media, you have N1. But to be honest, they’re not perfect either. Subjectively speaking, they’re doing something similar to what the pro-government media does, just from the opposite side.
That being said, they are still doing a much better job and trying to be more objective, though some of their reporting is debatable. Maybe if the roles were reversed, they’d act the same way—I don’t know. But right now, they are with us, and that’s what matters.
Isidora: I just want to add something. Independent media outlets constantly invite members of the ruling party to appear on their shows, but not once have they accepted. On the other hand, the pro-government media, which exists to spread propaganda, has never invited members of the opposition or anyone with a dissenting opinion.
So, there is a huge difference in how these media channels treat not just politicians, but also NGOs and other voices in society.
As Vladan said, media is never truly independent—there are always people behind them, controlling them, and some of those people are questionable as well. But for now, the reality is that they are the only way we can access information that isn’t just glorifying Vučić and the ruling party.
I think the reason why we’re trying to change the whole system, and not just the government, is because the problem isn’t just the government itself—it’s also the media.
Security and Threats Against Students
Interviewer: You have a security group. How did that come about?
Aleksandra: We originally had five working groups, and security was added as a necessity. Anyone can join, provided they’re a student. Even now, if someone from the Faculty of Law walks in and says, Hey, I want to join the security group, we let them. No problem. We just need to verify that they are actually students of the university
Vladan: It became essential after multiple attacks on students.
On January 14, during the Serbian New Year celebrations, a group attacked us with bottles, injuring several students. The police response was delayed, and we realized we had to protect ourselves.
Meanwhile, there are photos online showing the police beating up protesters like animals. It’s a big difference—some officers are honorable people who might even support our cause, but they can’t say it publicly. On the other side, you have officers who act as enforcers of the regime
Isidora: The violence isn’t limited to Belgrade. In Novi Sad, students were attacked with bats. One of our colleagues suffered a serious jaw injury.
That’s the main reason why we need security. But it’s not just about protecting ourselves from attackers—it’s also about keeping the movement organized.
For example, we have rules about students from other faculties entering our buildings. If we don’t check IDs, nothing serious would happen immediately, but then we’d have to let others in too. If we don’t enforce our own rules, they become meaningless.
The Role of Professors and Institutional Responses
Interviewer: Do you receive support from your professors?
Vladan: Many professors back us and offer legal guidance. They understand that this fight is about more than just our degrees—it’s about justice.
Interviewer: Have professors who oppose the protests acted against students?
Vladan: Some have, but we’re not worried. If a professor refuses to work with us, we can take the exam with someone else. We respect their expertise, but that doesn’t mean they are right about everything.
I believe in this cause. I’m sure I’m doing the right thing, and I’m ready to deal with whatever comes. If I have to study harder, if the professors set higher standards for me, I don’t care—I’ll still pass the exam. If not in one month, then in the next. It’s not a problem.
You can’t just change people overnight. I understand them—they are experts in their specific fields … And I respect that. But on other issues, they may not be as knowledgeable or experienced.
At the end of the day, they are still citizens like everyone else. The problem begins when they refuse to listen, when they believe their opinion is more valuable than others’. Right now, I put myself as a student on the same level as the professors in this situation, because we are all people, we all have rights.
I don’t see my future here. But I’m willing to give 100% of myself to make life better for those who stay. We’ll see what happens.
Expectations and Future
Interviewer: How do you feel, and what are your expectations—not just from an organizational point of view, but also personally? You mentioned some important moments earlier, but now let’s focus on the future. Where do you see yourself in the years to come?
Vladan: My future… well, as I told you, I’m going abroad for an exchange program. In ten years, I see myself working in some European court, maybe doing some side work as an entrepreneur.
I would love to come back to Serbia—if things improve. But I’m not sure that will happen. Even if we change this government, I’m not sure we will change as a society. And that, I believe, is the real issue.
The problem is bigger than just the government, and so is the solution. If people continue to feel what we have felt during these protests—if we finally realize that we only have one life and that our one life is here, in Serbia—then maybe we will start building a better country and developing ourselves.
Until then, I don’t see my future here. But I’m willing to give 100% of myself to make life better for those who stay. We’ll see what happens.
Aleksandra: Oh God, I don’t really like thinking that far ahead… but in five to ten years, I hope to be working in an international organization.
First, though, I just hope I graduate at some point—because, well, you know…
But ideally, I’d love to work in a place where I can help people, fight for justice, and stand up for what I believe in. Basically, what I’m doing now, but on a bigger scale.
I also hope I have enough time for hobbies, because I feel like in Serbia, so many people work from 9 to 5 without time to sing, create, or just enjoy life with their loved ones. So I guess I’d love to have that balance—to grow in every possible way.
Isidora: Like Vladan, I do think that now, more than ever, there’s a real chance for change. But at the same time, I feel like I’ve been too influenced by how things have been for so long.
I’m 19, and this system was established long before I was born. But especially since this ruling party took over, everything has become even more entrenched in this unjust and dysfunctional system.
So I’ve always kind of known that I wouldn’t want to stay here. But, like Vladan said, I want to give people the chance to build a future here … I’ve been looking at master’s programs in sports law in Spain, and that’s where I hope to see myself in some years. That would be my dream.
The Broader Political Context
Interviewer: These protests have drawn historical comparisons. Do you see parallels between this movement and past struggles for democracy in Serbia?
Vladan: Yes, definitely. Our parents tell us that they didn’t finish the job back then. They fought, they made a big change, but then they messed it up again afterward.
Interviewer: Do you really believe that the job isn’t done yet?
Vladan: Yes. I mean, just a few years after Milošević fell, his party came back to power.
Interviewer: Are you suggesting that there has been no real political change in the country in the last decades?
Vladan: Yes, there have been changes, but not significant ones. For example, even though Milošević was put on trial, the same people who were behind him managed to stay in power. A good example is the media system—it hasn’t really changed. You don’t realize how big the propaganda machine was. It was terrible.
It’s still the same people. The same ones behind the scenes, the same ones controlling everything. They just run their businesses, they rule as they please. Nothing has really changed—except that now, everyone is more aware of it.
Isidora: Yeah, and speaking of the media system—you know who was the Minister of Information in the 1990s, right?
That’s why I wanted to point this out. Earlier, we talked about how oppressive the information system in Serbia is. Well, guess who was in charge of that system back then?
We’ve tried to avoid making this just about him [Aleksandar Vučić] or about the ruling party. Obviously, it’s impossible not to mention them—they are the ones in power. But this isn’t just about one person. It’s about the entire system, and that’s what we keep repeating.
Vladan: He is responsible, of course. He is the most powerful person in the country, and he controls everything. But the problem goes beyond him. The real issue is the entire system that allows this to continue.
Interviewer: How do you see the crisis unfolding? What do you think will happen?
Vladan: Okay, if we’re talking about a utopian scenario, then here’s what should happen: First of all, if all the documents related to the incident were made public, a lot of people would end up in jail.
The president and his secretary were personally sending emails to rush the renovation of the building [in Novi Sad], pushing for it to be completed as quickly as possible. That’s the first issue.
We also now have a list of 25 people who were involved in beating up students. And we know there were more. Since the moment we made our demands, more and more names have surfaced.
Now, if these people are brought in for questioning, some of them will turn on the government to protect themselves.
Why? Because there are many high-ranking officials—including some ministers—who have been part of both this regime and the previous one, even when the Democratic Party was in power. These are people who moved from one party to another, always staying close to power.
And they have a lot of information that they’ve never shared publicly. If things start collapsing, some of them will start talking—and that could bring down the entire system.
If that happens, everything this government has built over the last 15 years could fall apart in just a few months.
So, for Vučić, this is a very delicate situation. His only strategy is to call for early elections—because he still has control over the narrative.
He relies on support from Bosnia, from pensioners, and from people who depend on government jobs and benefits. He’s buying time to tighten his grip even further.
Interviewer: What do you think will happen if elections are called?
Vladan: Personally, I don’t want elections. We’re not prepared for them. We don’t have an opposition worth voting for. The opposition is terrible, and we don’t want elections under these conditions.
We’re not a political organization—our demands are political, but we are not a political party. We just want the country to fix what it has broken. We want justice.
If I speed 10 or 15 kilometers over the limit, I’ll be fined. If I hit you right now, the police would arrest me within five minutes. So why is no one in jail for killing 15 people? That’s what we’re asking. That’s why we’re fighting.
Isidora: Personally, I find the opposition completely incompetent.
I don’t think anyone from the actual student-led protests has political aspirations. Nor do I think that the people actively involved in the blockades are doing this because they want political careers.
That being said, I am hopeful that a new generation will emerge—one that is competent enough to take part in politics and actually do the job properly.
But right now, the opposition doesn’t have that. That’s why no one trusts them to bring about meaningful change in society.
We’re also not comfortable when opposition politicians try to associate themselves with our protests.
This is not their protest.
Government-controlled media already spreads false narratives about us, calling us all kinds of names, inciting hate speech and violence against us.
When opposition politicians publicly support us, it doesn’t really help—it just gives the government an excuse to label us as part of a political agenda.
They are welcome as citizens, but not as representatives of political parties.
