The University of Belgrade, as the largest educational institution in Serbia, has 11 scientific research institutes. These institutes, together with the faculties, contribute to the international and scientific affirmation of the University of Belgrade.
According to the Law on Higher Education, the autonomy of the university implies the right to arrange the internal organization and the election of the governing body. According to the Statute of the University of Belgrade, the autonomy of the university also includes the right to choose the management and management body. Based on the Law on Science and Research, the management board of the scientific institute has seven members, of which the president and three members are appointed by the Government, and three members are proposed by the Institute's Scientific Council from among the researchers in scientific titles employed by the institute (ratio 4:3 in favor of the Government). The scientific council of the institute gives an opinion to the management board about the candidates who applied for the director's competition, and the management board, based on the prior consent of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development (hereinafter referred to as the Ministry), appoints the director of the institute.
This arrangement of organization and membership in the management boards of scientific institutions, imposed by the Ministry as the proposer of the law, directly violates Article 72 of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. With this article, the Constitution guarantees the autonomy not only of universities and higher education institutions, but also of scientific institutions, which include all the aforementioned institutes. Therefore, the imposition by the competent Ministry of parity, which foresees a greater number of politically elected members in the board of directors of the institution in relation to the number of members coming from the institution itself, is evidently a roundabout way of violating the autonomy of scientific institutions guaranteed by the Constitution, which, among other things, foresees independent decision-making on its arrangement and work.
From such, for the autonomy of the university and the scientific community, a large number of abuses arise, and the reputation of not only the scientific community, but also society as a whole is damaged by a pure demonstration of force. In the following text, we will describe in more detail several examples that happened during 2019.
1. Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade: The scientific council of the institute supported one candidate by majority, but at the board meeting held on February 20, 2019. year, 4 external members of the management board (appointed by the Government) overvoted 3 internal members (appointed by the Scientific Council) and voted for the minority candidate.
2. Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of Belgrade: In March 2019, the Government of Serbia appointed a board of directors headed by Zoran Avramović, known for his political engagement and non-academic labeling of dissident colleagues. On January 17, 2020, the Government of Serbia replaced three members of the board of directors, but Zoran Avramović remained the president, and one of the appointed members has a conflict of interest. Four days after that, an acting director who is not an employee was appointed.
3. Institute for Nuclear Sciences "Vinča", University of Belgrade: The scientific council of the institute supported Zlatko Rakočević by two-thirds, who as acting director began to stabilize the situation that arose after the forced resignation of the previous director, Milica Marcheta Kaninski, but at the session held on 12.7.2019. the members of the board of directors did not vote for the proposed candidate. 30/8/2019 In 2008, the members of the board of directors appointed Snežana Pajović as acting director at the meeting of the board of directors, which was interrupted due to employee protests and ended in the Ministry.
4. Institute for Multidisciplinary Research, University of Belgrade: The scientific council of the institute supported one candidate for the director by a majority (11:2), but at the meeting held on 02.12.2019. year, 4 external members of the board of directors overrode 3 internal members and voted for a minority candidate who is not employed at the institute and does not meet the conditions of the competition.
Trying to prevent the obvious violation of the university's autonomy, the institutes have so far unsuccessfully appealed to the minister, the state secretary for science, the Anti-corruption Agency, the media, SANA, female rectors, founded unions and staged protests. We will list a few examples of the Ministry's excuses for denying the systematic violation of university autonomy:
The Ministry's reply sent to the Institute for Nuclear Sciences "Vinca": "The scientific council is the scientific body of the institute and it only gives an opinion to the board of directors about the candidates who applied for the directorship. Every researcher has the right to express his opinion through petitions or in any other way, but the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development will adhere to the Law on Science and Research and the procedure for electing directors defined by this law."
The Institute for Nuclear Sciences "Vinča" has for years sent complaints to the Ministry to restore the management autonomy of the institute (one of them, for example, on 05/22/2015), and Minister Šarčević recently compared Vinča researchers to bandits.
The Ministry's response sent to the Institute for Medical Research in February 2019: "It is a legitimate right of the scientific council of the institute, founded by the Republic, to give an opinion on the registered candidates for the election of the director, that is, to decide and give support to a certain candidate ..., as is the legitimate right of the board of directors to at its meeting it decides on the proposal of a candidate for the director, in order to give the prior consent of the minister. Giving an opinion in legal theory and practice is not legally binding, nor is it prescribed as binding by the Law on Forensic Research."
Such answers by the Ministry are purely a cover-up behind formal provisions, which, as we stated at the very beginning, are arbitrary and in contradiction with the Constitution. How can someone who comes from outside, that is, outside the institute, know who is a better candidate for director? How can someone who appears at the institute 5-6 times a year, as a member of the Board of Directors, wish more good and success to the institute than the employees themselves who are there every working day? Why do four external members of the Board of Directors vote against the decision of the Scientific Council of employees at the institute?
Finally, once again from a legal point of view, this behavior of the Ministry and the management boards of the aforementioned institutes violated both the old Law on Scientific Research Activities and the new Law on Science and Research. The Board of Directors does not choose or prejudge the choice of the director of the institute, but only on the basis of the prior consent of the Ministry, appoints the director of the institute. Nowhere in the Law is it stated that the board of directors elects or proposes the director of the institute, but it is stated that the Scientific Council of the institute issues an opinion for the director. The interpretation of the Ministry is free that "it is the legitimate right of the board of directors to decide on the proposal of a candidate for director at its meeting". The Board of Directors decides on the proposal of a candidate for the director only when the opinion of the Institute's Scientific Council is forwarded to the Ministry for approval.
We state with indignation that it is unacceptable to us that the Secretary of State Vladimir Popović in the daily newspaper "Politika" accuses the academic initiators of this initiative of political coloration. We believe that this actually shows that he cannot state counter-arguments that would possibly call into question our indication of the violation of the institute's autonomy as a member of the university. It is inappropriate that from a public position in the relevant ministry, someone who is politically appointed there, gives himself the right to arbitrarily label colleagues from the university for expressing political views. State Secretary Vladimir Popović, although in his position of power he has already alienated himself from his colleagues yesterday, we still advise him to read the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, as well as the code of professional ethics of the University of Belgrade, before publicly stating his position on our initiative and activities.
*An abbreviated version of this text was published in Politics, February 24, 2020.
