UNS: The Committee for Culture and Information is knowingly violating the Law in the process of electing members of the REM Council.

“The UNS once again calls on the Board to apply the Law on Electronic Media (ZEM) as it stands, equally to all, without discrimination, to rectify the identified irregularities, and to act in accordance with the Law, rather than knowingly violating it,” stated the UNS in today's response.

The UNS emphasized that it "maintains its assertion that the candidates do not meet the legal requirements, that the Board has undeniable knowledge of these facts, and that despite this, it has taken a different stance and formed a final list. Such unlawful conduct cannot be justified by ‘purposefulness’ and vague claims that something ‘would not be legally grounded’.”

“The UNS believes that ‘purposefulness’ cannot justify discriminatory behavior and violation of the law, and the legal grounding the Association finds in the letter of the law which states that a printed media is not an electronic media, that a person who teaches a religious subject lacks the necessary knowledge as defined by Article 10 of the Law on Electronic Media, and that a candidate who personally states they have 9 years of work experience in their biography does not fulfill the legal requirements which stipulate a minimum of 10 years of work experience,” stated the UNS.

The Association reminded the Board that on June 13, the UNS submitted an Objection which, among other things, pointed out the violation of the provisions of the ZEM, specifically Articles 4, paragraph 1, point 6), Article 10, and Article 15.

The UNS also called on the Board to apply the legal provisions as they are written, equally to all, regardless of who the authorized proposers and candidates are.

After the Board provided the UNS with a Draft Report for the List of Members of the Regulatory Council with an invitation to present comments and remarks, the Association did so. 

The UNS first submitted comments to the Draft Report for the seven authorized proposers of the REM Council members, stating that six of the proposed candidates do not meet the conditions for selection as members of the REM Council.

The Board rejected the UNS's comments as unfounded.

The UNS responded to the Board that such a stance “indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of the provisions of the ZEM.”

Following the UNS's response, in a letter sent to the Association on July 21, the Board stated that no objections had been submitted regarding the candidates Mevlud Dudić, Sumeja Smajlović, and Muhedin Fijuljanin, whom the UNS mentioned as not meeting the conditions, nor had any organization contested their candidacy.

Therefore, the Board noted, it did not reconsider their candidacies and compliance with the conditions to be elected as members of the REM Council.

“At the very end, we would like to point out the fact that the Board has already established the List of Candidates and the list of organizations for members of the Regulatory Council as per Article 12, paragraph 1, points 1 to 4, 6), 8) and 9), and that a reconsideration of these groups of authorized proposers would not be legally grounded or purposeful at this time,” they added.

Today, in response to this stance of the Board, the UNS pointed out to this body that point 4, to which the Board refers in its response, stipulates that the Board will thoroughly consider the objections and reach conclusions regarding the suitability of proposers and candidates based on the criteria prescribed by the ZEM, and that proposers are granted the right to speak about candidates and authorized proposers they have objections to.

“As you are aware, the UNS was not given the opportunity on July 1 and 2, 2025, to explain its Objection, considering the multitude of objections and comments expressed by other organizations. The reason for this is a question for the Board for Culture and Information, not for the Association of Journalists of Serbia,” stated the UNS in today’s response.

“The UNS's objections have been rejected, even though the UNS pointed out and proved that certain candidates do not meet the legal requirements. The UNS considers the Board's stance presented in the Response of July 21 to be alarmingly incorrect,” stated the UNS.

The UNS reminded that the Board sent a Response to the Association regarding the raised objections on July 13, 2025, in which it detailed the reasons for each contested candidate, explaining why it believes the Association's objections are unfounded and which the UNS published. 

“Therefore, the Board did reconsider the candidacies of Mevlud Dudić, Sumeja Smajlović, and Muhedin Fijuljanin, and the claims from the Board's Response of July 21 that ‘there were no objections’ and ‘that the Board did not reconsider their candidacies’ are inaccurate,” noted the UNS. 

If there were no objections, the UNS questioned, “how could the Board reject them as unfounded, since something that does not exist cannot be rejected.”

“On the other hand, if the Board did not reconsider the candidacies, the question arises of how it took a stance on the validity of the raised objections and provided evidence. Clearly, something in the Board's response does not correspond to the truth,” reads the UNS's response to the Board for Culture and Information.