Along with the avalanche of protests spreading across Serbia, far from public attention, a group of environmental activists and scientists is waging war with the Ministry of Environmental Protection over a controversial bill that regulates no less than - how to breathe in Serbia
It's not easy being a polluter. Like anything else, breaking environmental regulations comes with a price – you may be the target of frequent inspections, work processes may suffer, financial losses may increase, and you may even be fined or involved in court proceedings. Although there are no such cases in Serbia, it may happen that the court rules against you because of air pollution. If there is monitoring of the state of the environment in your area, God forbid that it be some kind of local and independent measuring station, then you become a target of civil society organizations and unreasonable environmental activists, it may also happen that some malicious media write about you, and business partners may bypass you, and even consider you unprofitable in Europe because of the CO2 footprint. Your employees, and even you yourself, may be disturbed by the realization that you are harming the health of your neighbors and children with your business. It can also lead to insomnia.
It would be ideal to have a system and even a law that will protect you and that will once and for all clear up pollution monitoring, that will bring surveillance under control, dull and render the demands of civil society sterile, and even delete from the legal vocabulary such concepts as "interested public". It goes without saying that there is no long-term national plan against you and other polluters. On the contrary.
A step towards such an arrangement, where your pollution will be relativized, unmeasured, unregulated and hidden from the public, was taken by the current Ministry of Environmental Protection in a technical mandate, under the resigned minister Irena Vujović (at a time when her close friends are under house arrest due to the fall of the canopy), with the proposal of a new law ambitiously called the Air Protection Act. The reason for the new law is, on the other hand, the long-standing expectation of all those who are "annoyed" by polluters, as well as the 17-year-old need to harmonize the domestic legislation with the European Union Directive on air quality from 2008.
EARLY MISERABLES
The draft law on air protection is currently in the procedure. However, serious concerns about this law were expressed in a joint statement by 20 civil society associations, among which are the Regulatory Institute for Renewable Energy and the Environment (RERI), Belgrade Open School, WWF Adria, Center for Environmental Improvement, Center for Modern Skills, Ministry of Space, RES Foundation, Young Researchers of Serbia, Center for Green Policies and 11 other organizations.
These organizations state that the law-making process was not carried out in accordance with the applicable regulations and that even the minimum standards of public involvement in the process were not respected. The public debate on a complex and extensive draft law lasted only 20 days, which, according to these organizations, is not enough for a comprehensive analysis and discussion of the proposed solutions. The organizations also complain that the presentation of the draft was organized only in Belgrade, and that in a hybrid form - live and via the Internet due to the small capacity of the hall.
The preparation of the Draft Law on Air Protection began exactly one year ago. However, the associations-signatories of the joint statement state that there were only two civil society organizations in the 55-member Working Group for Drafting, "chosen through a competition with conditions that excluded in advance certain associations with proven expertise and long-term contribution in the fight for clean air".
When an early public review of the Draft Law was organized in November 2024, the public was confused. First of all, because public reviews are organized only for spatial and urban planning documents, and not in the case of laws. And then it was not an insight - only a part of the draft was available, which completely rendered the whole activity meaningless, although the Ministry states that the members of the Working Group analyzed 543 comments and suggestions on the basic text of the Draft Law. It will prove to be insufficient since, when the final Draft appeared, a new avalanche of objections and comments arrived, sent not only by non-governmental organizations, but also by researchers from our scientific institutions, as well as other citizens.
"The law seems to have been written with the aim of reducing as much as possible the number of obligations of the state in terms of air protection," Dr. Mirjana Perišić, a physicist who deals with air pollution at the Laboratory of Environmental Physics of the Institute of Physics in Belgrade, told "Vreme". As part of the public debate on the Draft Law, Dr. Perišić sent a series of remarks in which she criticizes the inaccuracy and insufficient definition, the lack of preventive measures, shortcomings in monitoring the state of air quality, and others.
PUBLIC HEALTH RISK
Meanwhile, the situation with air pollution is dramatic. The matter is so bad that every sixth funeral in Serbia was caused by air pollution. Namely, various studies and research that determine the so-called burden of disease and the number of premature deaths caused by air pollution show that around 15.000 people die annually in Serbia due to polluted air. According to data from the relevant study "Harm to human health from air pollution in Europe" published in December 2024 by the European Environment Agency (EEA), an average of 2,5 people die annually from PM10.800 pollution in Serbia. To that should be added 1500 premature deaths due to nitrogen oxide pollution and about 1500 due to ozone pollution.
What do these numbers really mean? According to the data of the Republic Institute of Statistics of Serbia, 98.000 people died in the country last year from a wide variety of natural and other causes. When you compare it, you can see that along with cardiovascular diseases, infections, cancer and suicides, pollution, especially particulate matter, is one of the biggest killers in Serbia - every sixth person will die prematurely due to polluted air, and according to the EEA study, PM2,5 particles are the cause of every tenth death in the country.
You might think that it is simply a tribute to modern life, people used to die in far greater numbers from infectious diseases and from violence, but when the situation is compared to other countries, it becomes clear that many of these deaths could have been avoided. Namely, a study dedicated to the Western Balkans entitled "Assessment of health impacts and costs attributable to air pollution in urban areas using two different approaches", signed by Claudio Bellis from the Joint Research Center with collaborators, and published in December 2023, showed that the number of premature deaths from pollution is twice as high in Serbia than in the countries of the European Union. In other words, if Serbia had regulations from the EU and with it European air, we would save seven to eight thousand lives every year.
In addition, the same study estimated that the economic damage in 26 cities of the Western Balkans due to PM2,5 pollution is between 8 and 9 billion euros. For Serbia, this means that due to unregulated air pollution, the country loses the value of building the Belgrade metro or one smaller nuclear power plant.
Perhaps these morbid data make you uncomfortable, but the data from the measuring stations convincingly show that the air quality in Serbia is extremely bad, and that it is even risky for public health. No automatic measuring station in Serbia has an average annual concentration of PM2,5 particles below 5 micrograms per meter, which is the recommendation of the World Health Organization that pollution should not be considered a "public health risk".
When it comes to specific pollution and not the average value, the WHO recommendation is that it should not exceed the critical value of 15 micrograms for more than three days during the year. According to the analysis made by the popular website "Klima 101", at the measuring point Stari grad this limit was exceeded in as many as 174 days during the previous year. The number of polluting days per year and elsewhere across the country is in the hundreds.
This is shown not only by reference measuring stations, but also by so-called citizen measurements. In the campaign presented by the Belgrade Open School last November, the air was of poor quality in 43 out of 79 municipalities in Serbia. According to the list of the IQAir company, whose application is widely used worldwide to monitor air quality, the air in Serbia is four times more polluted than WHO standards, and Serbia is in 43rd place from the bottom of the list of countries in terms of air quality. In Europe, it is the fourth with the most polluted air, and according to this list, it has better air only than Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Macedonia.
WHO WILL SALT THE AIR?
The proposed Draft Law on Air Protection not only does not offer convincing solutions to such a large health, legal and economic problem, but also seems to have ruled out the possibility of any solutions being reached. Unlike the previous one, according to the proposal of the new Law, there will be no National Plan for the reduction of emissions.
"It is proposed to delete the provisions that define this key instrument for reducing pollution from thermal power plants", according to the joint statement of twenty environmental organizations. "This proposal is particularly problematic considering that the thermal power plants of Elektroprivreda Srbije have been emitting four to six times more sulfur dioxide than allowed for seven years, thus endangering the health of citizens," according to representatives of the civil sector.
If you look more closely, the new Law will be blind to numerous levels of pollution as it introduces only two categories of air quality: 1. clean and slightly polluted and 2. polluted, when the limit values are exceeded.
"The draft law does not provide for intermediate categories of air quality, such as moderately polluted, unhealthy for sensitive groups or very unhealthy, which are used in internationally recognized air quality indices," Dr. Andreja Stojić, a physicist from the Laboratory of Environmental Physics of the Institute of Physics in Belgrade, told "Vreme", adding that "these categories are of essential importance for informing the public in a timely manner and taking preventive measures before serious damage to the health of the population occurs."
And while the spectrum of pollution levels is extremely simplified, on the other hand, the spectrum of possible excuses for pollution has increased, from higher forces and natural sources to extremely strange justifications - the bizarre idea (given in a legislative proposal of a ministry of the Republic of Serbia) that pollution will not be recognized (and therefore not sanctioned) when it is present - throwing salt on the roads - sounds almost surreal.
"Article 24 of the Draft Law further expands the list of potential justifications for poor air quality, citing as factors the contribution of sand and salt that are sprinkled on roads during the winter period," explains Dr. Andreja Stojić. "Although it is known that these materials can affect the resuspension of particles and a short-term increase in the concentration of particles, the Draft Law does not prescribe any methodologies or mechanisms that would enable a scientifically-based assessment of their actual impact on air quality."
With this provision, there is no doubt only the PR potential for justifying a high pollution index in the future.
AIR ON THE SCALE
A good system of state monitoring is one of the pillars of the fight against pollution, because without high-quality and unambiguous measurement (which is indisputable even in court), it is not possible to have a basis for citizens to be called to account for the violation of their rights to a healthy environment, and polluters to be held responsible because the "deed" in this case must first be measured. Scientists who, along with the non-governmental sector, actively read the Draft Law and sent comments, noticed a number of weak points in terms of measurement.
According to Dr. Mirjana Perišić, the draft law does not have a clearly established methodology for processing the results of measuring the concentrations of polluting substances, nor which institutions are responsible for those analyses. She states that the law provides for air modeling, but not what modeling technique is used, so it turns out that even the simplest statistical methods can be called modeling. It also does not prescribe who will do the modeling, which leaves a lot of room for manipulation.
Dr. Perišić also concludes that the Draft Law "does not take into account modern scientific knowledge when defining the number and types of pollutants used to assess air quality", adding that the proposed 12 parameters are not sufficient for a comprehensive analysis because none of them are specific to certain sources of pollution. On the other hand, some indicators such as lead in PM10 particles lost their importance even when unleaded gasoline was introduced, which reduced the concentration of lead in the air of cities tenfold. Dr. Mirjana Perišić states that the use of new technologies also brings with it new pollutants, which this Draft Law ignores, adding that it relies on basic pollutants prescribed by a 17-year-old European directive.
"The law does not provide a clear explanation as to why PM2,5 particles are only measured at remote locations, nor which chemical components are considered to be their constituents. This lack of clarity can lead to incomplete monitoring of air quality in rural and remote areas, where pollution can come from different sources," Dr. Gordana Jovanović, senior research associate at the Institute of Physics in Belgrade, told Vreme. She points to numerous similar technical failures, but also to those where terminology can be a block for correct measurements. "The law does not provide a clear enough explanation of the term 'indicative measurements', which can lead to different interpretations and doubts in its application", believes Gordana Jovanović, explaining that the lack of a precise definition and criteria that certain methods must meet can affect the accuracy and comparability of the obtained data, as well as compliance with the Air Protection Act.
"NO BODY - THERE IS NO WORK"
Most of the critics especially emphasize the bizarreness of the solutions for special purpose measurements.
"In cases of environmental pollution that can endanger people's health or the environment, it is crucial that the competent authorities react without delay - immediately, and not after 3 or 5 days", Mirko Popović, program director of RERI, told "Vreme", explaining the numerous "essentially wrong" solutions for such situations. Not only do incidents such as ammonia spills or fires require immediate responses, when measurements can provide life-saving information, but the polluter on special occasions is given enough time to cover up the source of the pollution.
According to the Draft Law, when there is a suspicion that pollution has occurred somewhere, the competent inspector goes to the field, prepares a report, on the basis of which the competent local self-government body determines the justification of the suspicion and, within 5 days, makes a decision on special purpose measurements. In RERI, they wonder what the purpose of the inspection is if the local self-government "certifies" the report, recalling how the Ministry has been claiming for years that local self-governments do not have the capacity to implement the law.
"Finally, if the competent authority does not make a decision on special purpose measurements within 5 days, there is no sanction for that," says Popović. He states that the Draft Law failed to improve inspection supervision, which is an important link in air protection. "In the letters that RERI received from the environmental protection inspection, it was stated that the inspector does not have the possibility to sanction EPS or order the suspension of the operation of facilities that operate illegally," explains Popović. He adds that if the legislator fails to prescribe legal consequences for breach of obligations, their application will remain a matter of goodwill of the person concerned.
"There is no body - no action, in short," says Popović, emphasizing that not only the operators were "spared" for future illegal activities - the responsible persons will not be held responsible if, for example, they do not order the operator to adopt a plan to reduce emissions, they do not implement the procedure for adopting air quality plans in accordance with the law, they do not implement measures from the Air Protection Program and air quality plans.
Bearing in mind all these shortcomings, it is not entirely clear what the Republic of Serbia was doing while it waited for 17 years to pass a law that takes care of air quality, which is harmonized with European regulations. The supreme irony is that the law expired even before it was passed. Namely, while this law is harmonized with the EU Directive from 2008, Popović reminds that the European Union adopted a new Directive on air quality last year. "When will we comply with this new directive, 2040 or in the month of Limburg?" asks Popović from the organization RERI.
Will the new Law on Air Protection even be adopted in the National Assembly considering that it is proposed by the ministry in resignation? The Law on the Government stipulates that the government in a technical mandate (whose mandate has ended) can only carry out current affairs and cannot propose laws and other general acts to the National Assembly or pass regulations. The exception is if the adoption of regulations is related to a legal deadline or is dictated by the needs of the state, the interests of defense or a natural, economic or technical accident.
"As we have not noticed that this government has adhered to its legal obligations so far, we would not be surprised if the proposal of this unhappily concluded and unfinished normative attempt reached the parliament in the form in which it was presented to the public", says Mirko Popović from the RERI organization, who believes that the question of the government's capacity is irrelevant. "About 3,8 million citizens of Serbia live in cities and municipalities where the air is excessively polluted. That is almost 60 percent of the population of this country", concludes Popović.
The Aarhus Convention, to which the Republic of Serbia is a signatory, states that foreigners should receive accurate information about the quality of air, water and other parameters that affect the environment, as well as the health of people and animals. Another right from this convention refers to the participation of citizens in making decisions about the environment. A group of 20 non-governmental organizations, as well as a number of researchers, strongly criticized the Draft Law on Air Protection, which is currently in the procedure, due to its lack of transparency and insufficient concern for accurate information on the state of the air. If our rights to information and to participate in the adoption of regulations are violated, the Aarhus Convention provides for access to justice. Given how much energy it takes to get the domestic judiciary to address the problem of falling canopy and apparent violence, who will encourage it to deal with the air?
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.
Who mentions the extraordinary elections when the rating of the party in power is falling, and according to all surveys, Vučić is not the most important political factor in the country, but the students?
The brutal beating of students and citizens in Novi Sad shows that the regime is not only ready to take revenge - it is actually carrying it out
If in reality the principle of balance is violated - the way the incompetent regime violated the relationship between the concrete elements at the Novi Sad Railway Station - reality will behave like a canopy: it will fail to obey
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
