During the latter part of the conference titled “Civic Mobilization as a Response to Institutional Deficit,” organized by the Center for Civic Education (CCE) and the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES), it was noted that the government labels legitimate critics as criminals, attempting to criminalize criticism.

Executive Director of Action for Human Rights, Tea Gorjanc Prelević, opined in the panel discussion “The Voice of Citizens in Times of Crisis: Democracy Under Pressure” that individuals in the NGO sector are only marginally better equipped to serve the public interest.

“Yet, we all began as individual activists. An activist doesn’t necessarily originate from an NGO. NGOs can assist with logistics and media, helping to articulate certain issues and bring attention to facts—that’s our role,” explained Gorjanc Prelević.

She highlighted that NGOs have supported various protests, notably the earlier “Resist” and the recent demonstrations organized by the informal student group “Where’s Tomorrow?”, standing by and defending their organizers when they faced attacks.

“The government acts on legitimate critics by labeling them as criminals and tries to categorically turn that criticism into something unlawful. This is a significant blow to freedom of expression,” she asserted, adding that educating young people about protest history is crucial.

Gorjanc Prelević noted that while the anti-war movement of the 1990s was not particularly effective, it remains an important point of reference. “We can take pride in knowing that even though they were a minority, these individuals raised awareness among the populace,” she clarified.

She stressed the importance of implementing civic education in schools for various reasons.

According to Gorjanc Prelević, civil protest is vital as it is grounded in constitutional values. “A citizen has the right to demand accountability and the resignation of the president, prime minister, or ministers. However, labeling a citizen as part of the mafia without evidence is unacceptable,” she asserted.

Executive Director of Civic Initiatives in Serbia, Maja Stojanović, remarked that the region has faced numerous challenges, leading to a considerable degree of cynicism. “This skepticism often surfaces when discussing future steps due to everything we’ve experienced,” she sighed.

Stojanović indicated that recent protests demonstrate a potential that exceeds expectations, with young people clearly conveying their capacity and knowledge. “They are voicing demands much more assertively than older generations on issues we have long advocated for,” she noted.

She urged individuals to think independently and advocate for their rights, asserting, “I believe those who fight for their rights can anticipate better outcomes.”

Historian Miloš Vukanović, reflecting on past protests, stated that there’s a tendency to seek patterns from contemporary perspectives. He identified three pivotal protests in Belgrade: those of the 1930s, 1968, and the 1990s.

“The first two were tied to ideological shifts within Yugoslavia, but it’s essential to keep tabs on the 1968 protests, not only in Yugoslavia but throughout Europe. It marked a watershed moment for what protests could achieve and their lasting impact. Before 1968, young individuals were expected to be active, conscientious citizens willing to go to war, while post-1968 brought pacifist values and ecological awareness to the forefront,” Vukanović elucidated.

He mentioned that student protests advocate for new values. “If they succeed in establishing such values, they will endure for future generations. Young people wield significant influence as time is on their side,” he prophesied.

Vukanović also recalled two significant student protests in Montenegro—the demonstrations in 2011 and the ongoing protests led by the informal group “Where to Tomorrow.”

“During the 2011 protests at the Assembly, their social demands were largely met,” he recalled.

He pointed out that one consequence of the “Where’s Tomorrow” protests is the diminished credibility of the political structure overseeing the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Vukanović asserted that although protests sometimes fall short, their ideas persist. “Recently, there were four smaller protests in Montenegro at one time, marking a small victory on Beogradska Street. Progress was made because activists began to shift the narrative. The ‘Where to Tomorrow’ movement established a concept.”

Addressing the protests that followed the tragedy in Cetinje, he emphasized the need to convey that accepting a position entails accepting its inherent responsibilities.

Professor Jasna Tatar Anđelić from the Faculty of Philology at the University of Montenegro (UCG) asserted that the “Where to Tomorrow” movement illustrates potential methods for mobilization.

“Civic society is built gradually. Mobilization, protests, and the accompanying culture develop over time. Advocacy for civic awareness must begin at an early age,” Tatar Anđelić highlighted.

She noted having no clear solution for motivating her colleagues at the University of Montenegro, stating that merely choosing an academic path does not guarantee one will become a free thinker.

She believes that all reasons for protest are valid. “Civic activism reinforces the idea that all grievances are legitimate. We are the holders of sovereignty and must also work on informal structures of organization. Civic mobilization is a long-term endeavor,” she added.

Director Andro Martinović stated that artists cannot afford to remain neutral in times of systemic injustice.

“Their societal status influences this. Essentially, status determines artists’ roles in society. It all boils down to the shared concept of freedom. The notion of freedom is inextricably linked to the citizen,” he argued.

On the topic of protests in Serbia, Martinović suggested they lacked a clear objective. “There were two missed opportunities; clear demands should have been articulated sooner. If you embark on such initiatives without established goals, there’s a risk that the gathered energy may go untapped,” he cautioned.

“To achieve significant change, sometimes one must take risks,” Martinović emphasized.

He also mentioned that it’s essential not to constantly combat divisions and to reject the prevailing narratives. “Diversity of thought is valuable; differing expressions should be welcomed,” he contended.

Commenting on regional dynamics, he noted the interconnectedness of countries, and stated, “that’s why we take care of each other.”

“The concept of a Serbian world holds effects that necessitate a response, and Montenegro must provide this,” summarized Martinović.

News