A technical government, or a government of experts, would have the task of creating the conditions of possibility for the re-establishment of the rule of constitution and law. Because of that, it is quite expected that factually the leader rejects the proposal to establish a technical government: if he agreed to a technical government, he would formally disempower himself. In other words, technical government is a political, not a legal issue
Once upon a time, on December 18, 2024, the colorful doctor Branimir Nestorović declared (as reported by Beta) that "before I will pull three solutions: technical government, dictatorship or coup”.
He would have to explain himself how the cheerful allergist imagined a coup d'état. He did not have to imagine the dictatorship, however, since the dictatorship - in each of its forms - was at work even in those ancient times when he chose to express himself about unusual events in the country of Serbia. Let's note that this circumstance - that he lives in a dictatorship - escaped him probably because he himself participated in it. Surprisingly, the expert on pollen and aliens did not hit the dictator with either of those two qualifications, but with the third one, about technical government.
Talkative and neurotic as he is, the president of the republic replied to Nestorović, a connoisseur of the most ridiculous virus in the world, the very next day: "According to the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, no one else can appoint a representative for the composition of any government. I always hate technique and technical issues."
Apart from the fact that we learned a detail from his private life, namely that he "always hates technology and technical issues" - although we did not see hatred towards the government in the technical mandate of the fallen Vucevic Miloš - the president rejected the possibility of a technical government, referring to constitutional and legal provisions (which is an interesting detail for someone who tramples on the constitution and violates laws with every gesture).
A less careful reader or a less familiar with the situation in Serbia, could notice that there is a whole series of illogicalities here, hence the clarification. Namely, the president of the republic constantly says what he doesn't mean and means what he doesn't say, that is, he doesn't look at small things like logic and sense, so when he says that he "always hates technology and technical issues" he is actually saying that he always loves technology and technical issues, provided, of course, that they are in his favor. He hates the technical government because he hates technology and technical issues, but he loves the government in the technical mandate of the fallen Vucevic Miloš (although he hates the technical government) because he really likes this technical government. What is not clear here?
STATE OF EMERGENCY
But a technical government is not a constitutional category, just as neither is a coup d'état or a dictatorship. Logically. The constitution and laws are the armatures of the political-legal order. The constitution cannot include categories that suspend the constitution, laws and said order, because that would leave the possibility for the order to abolish itself. This would mean that the order has built in a button to turn itself off, which goes against the legal and political logic of the order.
An interesting exception is, admittedly, the state of emergency in which the competent institution, under very precise (but actually imprecise) conditions, temporarily suspends the legal and political order precisely in order to preserve it. In case of war, for example. The problem with the situation here is that Vučić and his interest group are already there de facto suspended the legal and political order of Serbia - the institutional division of power - all power de facto handed over to one man (the definition of dictatorship), which means that an undeclared, de facto state of emergency is in effect. To that extent, if we follow the logic, we could say that in the case of the introduction of a state of emergency, there would be a double negation (minus and minus give a plus, a state of emergency by which the state of emergency is abolished leads to a normal state), that is, the abolition of the factual state and a return to the framework of the legal order. (Aren't the citizens of Serbia demanding exactly that: a return from the wild, arbitrary, corrupt rule of one man to a state of law?)
However, legal logic is not at work here, because the dictatorship does not respect the constitution and laws, and the formal introduction of a state of emergency would mean an attempt by the dictatorship to preserve the privileges of a small number of people who do not act within the constitutional and legal framework anyway. To that extent, the technical or transitional government - which, as we will see, are not synonymous - would have the task of creating the conditions for the re-establishment of the rule of the constitution and law. Because of that, it is quite expected that factually the leader rejects the proposal to establish a technical government: if he agreed to a technical government, he would formally (de jure) dispossessed himself. In other words, technical government is a political, not a legal issue.
CLARIFICATIONS
Law professor Bojan Pajtić specifies: "Technical government" is a political term that indicates the goal for which it was elected. It is most often formed in the absence of citizens' trust in political actors, that is, with the task of responding to the social crisis that led to the need for such an institution. in other legal systems, the government can only be elected by a parliamentary majority. In order to be elected in Serbia, at least 126 deputies must vote for it, and the technical government has the same powers as the government, which is made up of representatives of political parties. However, given that the parliamentary majority can vote no confidence in it at any time, it can be assumed that the technical government will stick to the given tasks in its work. Therefore, according to legal regulations, the government is the government, but a political decision can limit its duration and scope of work. An example is Monti's government in Italy, which was elected in 2011 to pull the country out of a devastating economic crisis, and it was made up of experts who were not present in political life".
Therefore, the term "technical government" is not the same as "transitional government". Pajtić continues: "On the other hand, we have the institute of the so-called transitional government. Unlike the technical one, which is usually not made up of politicians, as a rule, all participants in political life are made up, again in order to solve the crisis in which the country found itself. We had such an example in Serbia in 2000, between the October 2024th elections and the parliamentary elections, and the last example was seen in Macedonia in XNUMX. under normal circumstances, as well as limited tasks that usually relate to the creation of conditions for democratic elections. However, this kind of government, as well as a technical government, is not regulated under that name by the Constitution and laws. It also formally has the same powers as any other government, but its 'term', as well as the scope of its activities, is limited by the political agreement of the parties, on whose representatives that government depends."
Considering the experience in political life, we ask Bojan Pajtić if a technical government is some kind of solution, a possibility to get out of the crisis?
PROPOSERS
"Not only do I believe that Serbia needs a technical government made up of non-politicians, but it is a prerequisite for resolving the crisis in which Serbia found itself. In the end, nothing depended on him. Such a government could be proposed by the students, but it is clear that they do not want to step forward on behalf of all citizens. That is a legitimate position. The fact that they insist on the same demands gave them such broad support, besides the students, that the citizens support it by acclamation. It must be a broad, ideologically diverse forum that has the social and professional authority to propose an expert government who supported the blockade at the beginning students, thereby showing civil courage, but also the desire for discontinuity with the rule of force and lawlessness. That would definitely be the best government that Serbia has ever had in terms of quality."
At the moment when this text was written, the ProGlas group came up with the idea of a government of social trust, which is a type of transitional government. The president of the republic could propose that government. Professor of constitutional law, Marjana Pajvančić, on behalf of ProGlas, pointed out that the Constitution provides a space for government and citizens to meet in the general interest. When asked by a journalist if such a thing is possible under these circumstances, law professor Miodrag Jovanović insists that it is important to look at reality through positive glasses, and to offer something that is important for the discussion of different parts of society. The situation in society, said Jovanović, is unsustainable. The students, for their part, did everything possible, now it is up to other actors to organize free and fair elections, Jovanović concluded.
Less than two days of blockade - that's how long it took to see how weak and powerless the public media service is, both from the outside and from the inside. At the moment of writing this text, it is the eighth day of the blockade, and the sixth that RTS is not broadcasting its program. They also seem to be facing a strike inside the house. And the essence of blocking RTS is not in what it publishes, but in what it keeps silent
In the months after the fall of the canopy in Novi Sad, the flames of rebellion spread throughout Serbia. The first protests started in Novi Sad right after the tragedy. The authorities responded with arrests, police cordons and intimidation, but instead of calming down the protesters, new protests followed.
The rector of the University of Belgrade, Vladan Đokić, has been the target of top state officials and regime tabloids for months, who label him as an insidious instigator of student protests, an opportunist, "the face of evil" and "the leader of the criminal octopus." How and why a rector became "state enemy number one"
"I'm standing in the cordon, and my daughter is shouting at me 'aw, aw, killers'. What should I do? If they ordered me - I would throw down my baton and bulletproof vest and stand on the side of my child," a police officer from the south of Serbia, who works as needed in the Belgrade Police Brigade, told "Vreme"
The recent formation of the Đura Macuta government is part of the regime's revenge and cynicism. This can be seen most in the "black troika" of new ministers appointed to deal with the parts of society that are the leaders and symbols of the big rebellion that lasted for several months, the cause of which was the fall of the canopy in Novi Sad, which claimed 16 human lives. Education, universities, unsolicited media and parts of the judiciary that refuse to listen to orders, either publicly, with announcements, or hiding behind legal procedures, should be dismantled. Those who will have no problem doing everything they are told, even reinforcing the orders with their own inventions, are chosen for this.
RTS is blocked, universities do not work, and threats, insults and calls to the prosecutor's office and the police to arrest blockers, rioters and terrorists are pouring out from the top of the government. The Serbian state has turned into a farce
Anyone who condemns the regime's targeting of people from the media, the non-governmental sector, the opposition and universities, must not agree to this targeting of RTS editors and journalists either.
The government of Đur Mazut is "counter-revolutionary", focused on retaliation and state and street violence against opponents of the regime
The archive of the weekly Vreme includes all our digital editions, since the very beginning of our work. All issues can be downloaded in PDF format, by purchasing the digital edition, or you can read all available texts from the selected issue.
See all
