A BIRODI/PG Mreža consultative online survey on the courts and public prosecution (10 December 2024; N=1,035) draws a very clear picture: respondents see the judiciary as a system where equality before the law practically does not exist, and they explain this primarily through political influence and corruption.
Asked whether “all citizens are equal before the law,” only 8.6% answered yes, while 89.7% said no. Politically speaking, this reads like a verdict: most respondents are not describing isolated mistakes, but a collapse of confidence in the principle itself.
It is also telling what this perception is based on. The largest share say they form their view of the courts through the media (22.2%), followed by personal participation in proceedings (15.7%) and the experience of people close to them (13.6%), but also through lawyers (11.0%) and employees within the judiciary (10.6%). For the prosecution service, the media role is even stronger (29.8%), followed by experiences of close contacts (20.1%) and lawyers (11.8%). In other words, this is not only “an internet story”—a substantial portion of respondents report arriving at their views via direct contact or professional channels.
Trust scores are devastating. Trust in the courts is “very low” for 66.9% (plus 22.8% “low”), while trust in the public prosecutor’s office is “very low” for 75.2% (plus 16.3% “low”). In parallel, perceived political influence is off the charts: “very high” is selected by 80.9% for the courts and 83.1% for the prosecution (with roughly another 9% choosing “high”).
Perceived corruption follows the same pattern: in the courts it is “very high” for 64.4% and “high” for 20.0%; in the prosecution, “very high” for 66.4% and “high” for 18.7%. When asked why distrust exists, 57.0% choose the explanation that Serbia is a highly corrupt state and the judiciary cannot be an exception, while 20.3% point directly to the lack of judicial independence.
In this environment, respondents also send a normative message about what they expect from judges. Only 1.6% say the most important thing is that a ruling be fast; 45.5% choose “lawful/fair” (in line with law and procedure), while 53.0% prioritize “just” in a broader sense—aligned with justice, humanity, and moral principles. In short: most are not asking for shortcuts; they are asking for meaning and legitimacy.
The sample profile suggests who is speaking: 56% women, with the largest age groups 46–55 and 56–65, and more than half holding a university degree (52.2%). Geographically, the largest shares come from Belgrade (34.5%) and Vojvodina (27.9%). An important interpretive note: the sample is online and consultative, so it reflects the strong attitudes of a more active segment of the public—but precisely for that reason, it functions as a signal of social pressure that is hard to ignore.