Of course.
Citizens were not informed, and the answer is straightforward: neither was the government. This is highly problematic because the state itself was the primary recipient of company reports before issuing and extending permits. Our legal office, representing the "March for the Drina" initiative, has obtained a vast number of documents through official requests for information. We have analyzed compliance with mining laws since Rio Tinto’s operations began in Serbia, evaluating both company and government obligations, including whether the company submitted required reports and whether the state conducted adequate oversight. Alarmingly, official responses from the Ministry of Mining confirm that they do not possess the documentation they should legally have. If it's not a problem, I have prepared, I can read a few things.
The result of the protests in the fall and winter of 2021 was that at the beginning of 2022, the state annulled the decree that established the spatial plan for the special-purpose area for the implementation of the Jadar project. It sounds complicated. If you allow me, I will explain in one sentence. The spatial plan for a special-purpose area is adopted by the government in this case through a decree, it establishes it, and it serves as the basis for carrying out further procedures that should lead to the realization of the project. Let’s say that, in that sense, this decree is a kind of law. Everything else is implemented based on it. In January 2022, the government annulled its decree on the spatial plan, on which further procedures were based—impact assessments, unified procedures for issuing permits, procedures before the Ministry of Mining for granting approval for an exploitation field, and so on. When the foundation—the decree—disappeared, all these procedures had to be suspended, and the decisions made up to that point annulled. It is completely logical. Most procedures were indeed suspended, most decisions were annulled, including some decisions on impact assessments, and so on. The only procedure that was directly based on this spatial plan decree was the procedure conducted by the Ministry of Mining and Energy for granting approval for the exploitation field. The procedures in mining, construction, and environmental protection are closely connected and interdependent. A mining procedure for an exploitation field cannot be conducted unless an environmental impact assessment for that area is first conducted by the Ministry of Environmental Protection. So, this mining procedure was conducted unlawfully. First, it had to be suspended because the decree was annulled. Second, it had to be suspended because the decision on the scope and content, which was the basis for this procedure, was annulled. Neither then nor today has the Ministry of Mining suspended this procedure. Today, there are additional reasons for its suspension since a new impact assessment procedure is being conducted before the Ministry of Environmental Protection, which is not the previous one. So, logically, based on the new impact assessment procedure, the Ministry of Mining would have to conduct a new procedure for the exploitation field, and so on. But that is not the only issue. That may be the focus, but it is not the only issue. Infrastructure projects and their accompanying procedures were never suspended. The expressway connecting Valjevo and Loznica, the gas pipeline connecting Valjevo and Loznica, the high-voltage network, the railway. In the documentation of the Government of Serbia and the ministries I have just talked about, it is explicitly stated that these projects serve the realization of the Jadar project. This is very important. They are not meant to connect Valjevo and Loznica so that a Valjevo resident can reach Loznica faster for lunch with their friend. They serve so that a truck carrying sulfuric acid from Valjevo can reach Jadar.
It is not in accordance with the law.
Since January 2022, the situation has been that the government adopted a new decree, which annulled the decree on the spatial plan for the Jadar project. Until July this year, that second decree was in effect. The first decree was annulled, and the second one was valid. Rio Tinto challenged this second decree before the Constitutional Court, and the Constitutional Court ruled that this second decree was unconstitutional and unlawful. These are strong words, but that is not entirely the case. The Constitutional Court declared the second decree unconstitutional and unlawful not because of its content, nor did it dispute the government's right to decide on these matters, but because of the procedure in which it was adopted. And in its explanation, the Constitutional Court repeatedly emphasizes that declaring the second decree unconstitutional does not revive the project or bring the first decree back into legal force—it ceased to exist permanently. Nevertheless, I would say that, by exploiting the atmosphere created in public discourse—perhaps through media outlets that support the project and have a significant influence on our homes—the government, under the pretext of implementing the Constitutional Court's decision (which is not true), adopted a new, third decree, let’s say, stating in just two sentences:
‘The decree on the spatial plan, the first one that was annulled, is re-applied.’
This is illegal and unconstitutional to the extent that no trace of legality or constitutionality can be found in such a decree.
Well, as I told you, it's an atmosphere in which companies—and even the state—are used to not having to comply with all laws. That’s the reason. It can be called arrogance, recklessness, overprotection, ignorance, or even naivety. Everyone will interpret it differently based on their values, but legally speaking, for the past 20 years in Serbia, a system has been created that serves not to be obeyed. This system creation significantly disturbs citizens, because in the past few months—and even over the past few years—we have been hearing stories that Serbia will become some kind of mining destination.
All the companies that are now exploring lithium, as well as those that have done so in the past, are closely connected and cooperate very closely. Let’s put it this way—when applied geological explorations for borates (boron), lithium, and related elements began, the group of people organizing and leading these explorations was very small. They were so connected that some of them were even related, like the Grubin brothers, for example.
Before EuroLithium started its explorations in Valjevo, Rio Tinto was already there. To put it figuratively, Rio Tinto drilled several holes in a circle and then left. Later, EuroLithium came and drilled a hole in the center of that circle—and found boron. These companies frequently exchange personnel—on a monthly or yearly basis—from geology experts to marketing managers and top executives. Some individuals have, at different points, been founders, directors, or owners of multiple mining companies. Why is this important? It’s important because people need to understand that there aren’t many of them. It’s a small group of individuals with personal interests. The number of local residents in Valjevo and its villages who stood up against them is far greater. 900 people, 2,000 people, even just 50 people—that’s still more than the number of people on the other side. We shouldn’t be fooled into thinking that working for EuroLithium is "cool" or that it’s trendy to say, “I work at Rio Sava.” It’s not. And I doubt that even those who work at Rio Sava are happy about it. I also doubt that the officials in the ministries, who are supposed to sign off on approvals, are too eager to do so. This is what Serbian citizens need to understand—Valjevo is proof that legal action can be effective and that victory is possible when people stand together, stay informed, and are ready to act.
First and foremost, let’s remember that many legal professionals work in state institutions. The general perception among citizens that government institutions are incompetent does not apply to these legal experts. In our country, there are still skilled lawyers with integrity, who remember their oaths, their state exams, their universities, and the reasons why they chose to pursue law in the first place. They should, in accordance with their profession and calling, take these legal processes out of the hands of politics. We are not engaged in politics; we are engaged in upholding the law. They should remove these cases from political influence and restore legality to these procedures, even if it means risking their jobs, their integrity, and their reputation. Every time they are pressured to sign an illegal decision, they should ask themselves: where is their integrity? This doesn’t happen often, but they should not succumb to such pressure, and they should know that their colleagues outside the state system support them. I also want to commend my fellow lawyers, as we have seen an increasing involvement of bar associations and legal professionals in public discussions on these matters. Even those who are not specialists in environmental law are participating in the discourse, sharing their opinions and assessments. We have now reached a point where we are no longer discussing technical details of environmental law—we are debating the very foundations of our legal system. And the legal profession recognizes this. Lawyers must empower and support citizens—without fear—and help them in this fight.
Yes, a large number of people—more than a hundred citizens—submitted objections and opinions during the process initiated by the Rio Sava company. I had access to these objections at the Ministry of Environmental Protection, and the majority of them were well-founded, pointing out the reasons why this decision should not have been made. However, the Ministry issued the decision, determining the scope and content of the environmental impact assessment study for the mining segment of the Jadar project, and citizens are currently filing appeals against it. The Administrative Commission is expected to rule on these appeals, but we can assume that all objections will be rejected, allowing Rio Sava to proceed to the third phase of the environmental impact assessment. This phase is crucial because it evaluates the quality of the environmental impact study and determines whether approval will be granted or denied. If approval is granted, the company can proceed with obtaining the necessary permits for exploitation.
What is almost unbelievable is that immediately after issuing the decision on the scope and content of the study, the state adopted two new laws in the field of environmental impact assessment—the Law on Strategic Environmental Assessment and the Law on Environmental Impact Assessment. The Law on Environmental Impact Assessment was adopted right after this decision because the new law will apply to the third phase of the process. I will explain why this is problematic, but first, I want to comment on the Law on Strategic Environmental Assessment. This law regulates the impact assessment of plans and programs, spatial plans, development plans, and so on. You can stop reading the law after Article 2, which defines exemptions from its application. One of the exemptions is the highest-ranking planning document in our country—the development plan and the investment plan that elaborates on the development plan. Why do I say you don’t need to read the law beyond that? Because any strategic environmental assessments conducted for lower-ranking plans will be meaningless if they must already align with the highest-ranking plan. This will create a simulated process, where citizens will think they have some influence, but in reality, they won’t, as the results of these strategic assessments will be predetermined.
The new Law on Environmental Impact Assessment, which is highly relevant and, in my opinion, adopted specifically because of the Jadar project, is essentially unenforceable. It introduces even some extralegal categories that allow investors to bypass the entire process. Even before the process begins, the law contradicts other laws, such as the Law on Planning and Construction and the Law on Mining and Geological Research. From the very first step, all authorities responsible for conducting environmental impact assessments will face serious difficulties in implementing this process, to the detriment of both the environment and the citizens of Serbia.
What is particularly concerning regarding the Jadar project is that under the new law, the public may be denied access to all key information held by authorities about projects and project documentation—if the investor decides that such information is their intellectual property and classifies it as a trade secret. In such cases, the ministry is obligated to withhold this information from the public.
The interested public, as a party in the process, appears only twice in the procedural section of the law. To put this into perspective, in the European Union directive, the interested public appears as a party in the process 18 times.
Moreover, none of the decisions made in the environmental impact assessment process will be published. Only a notification will be issued—essentially, "Hey, people, a decision has been made"—but the content of the decision will not be available to the public. This means that provisions allowing the public to appeal or file a lawsuit with the Administrative Court within, for example, 15 days, will become meaningless. The public will not even know what they are appealing against or suing over.
To conclude, a law written in this manner is not the work of legal experts—or if it is, then it was written by incompetent lawyers. This law will result in a situation where no state body responsible for environmental impact assessments or related procedures will be able to issue a single legally valid decision in these cases.
I believe that citizens should use all legal means available to them, no matter how limited they are. When citizens exercise their rights and the legal mechanisms at their disposal, it often puts the authorities conducting the process in a very difficult—sometimes even unbearable—position. If we start with administrative matters, for example, they are required to record every request, every objection, and every remark, which creates complications for them.
We do have legal remedies. They are harder to use, more complicated, and more demanding, but they exist. We have the right to appeal, the right to file lawsuits with the Administrative Court. Every citizen involved in the process is a party to it, regardless of what the Ministry thinks or writes. We still have a general legal framework regulating administrative procedures, which sets certain guarantees and principles that cannot be overridden by special laws. What might be more challenging now is that citizens no longer have all the necessary information in one place. It requires some legal knowledge, resourcefulness, and more persistence than before to achieve any form of justice. Citizens should exercise all their rights at every opportunity. When the environmental impact study is published, thousands—tens of thousands—of Serbian citizens should submit objections. It costs nothing, it doesn't hurt, and you can write them by hand and submit them at the Ministry of Environmental Protection or send them by mail. Attend public hearings, take the microphone, and express your opinion. The moment you speak at a public hearing, you become a party in the proceedings and gain legal standing. This means you have the right to appeal decisions and file lawsuits against higher-instance rulings. Only by using their rights can citizens—and all of us—stand a chance. If we give up now and say, "They have passed these laws, we have no chance," then we truly have no chance. It’s black or white.
Our guests, independent experts from various scientific fields, will provide professional and objective opinions on this topic, which has far-reaching consequences for our environment, future generations, and public health.
Naši gosti, nezavisni stručnjaci iz raznih naučnih oblasti, pružiće stručno i objektivno mišljenje o ovoj temi, koja ima dalekosežne posledice za našu prirodu, buduće generacije i zdravlje.
© Copyright 2026. All right reserved