Pupin Initiative report: Silence does not mean safety — rights before politics in Kosovo

The Pupin Initiative has published an exclusive report aimed at deepening understanding of the legal, security, administrative and religious-freedom challenges facing the Serbian community in Kosovo. The report states that fewer reported incidents do not necessarily mean greater security and calls for independent verification of completed and publicly documented investigations, better access to justice and more effective protection of Serbian communities, monasteries, cemeteries and returnee settlements.

The report is structured around ten points and was prepared in cooperation with Archimandrite Sava Janjic, Abbot of the Visoki Decani Monastery; Jovana Radosavljevic, an MP representing the Serb List who has also worked closely with the Serbian community through the civil sector; and a participant in the 2026 Vidovdan gathering at Gazimestan who was detained following the memorial service.

The report’s central warning is straightforward: fewer reported incidents do not necessarily mean greater security.

“When citizens lose trust in the institutions responsible for receiving complaints, silence can conceal harm and lead to inaccurate security assessments. The report therefore calls for independent verification of completed and publicly documented investigations, better access to justice and more effective protection of Serbian communities, monasteries, cemeteries and returnee settlements,” the report states.

In its summary of the report, the Pupin Initiative stresses that it is neither a demand for privileges nor an attempt to prejudge ongoing proceedings, but rather an appeal for the same standards of human rights, rule of law and institutional accountability to be applied consistently to everyone.

When fewer reported cases do not mean greater security

The report challenges an assumption underlying decision-making in Kosovo—that a decline in the number of recorded incidents constitutes evidence of improved security.

“In August 2026, KFOR began transitioning away from its permanent presence on the main bridge over the Ibar, citing improved conditions. Eight days later, the Kosovo Police Inspectorate recommended the suspension of two police officers over suspected mistreatment in the case of Nenad Raskovic. Both developments can coexist because they measure different realities. If people stop reporting abuses because they do not trust the institutions to which complaints are submitted, declining statistics may indicate fear rather than safety,” the report states.

The mechanism of silence

The report points out that citizens may refrain from reporting alleged misconduct when they expect that they will not receive legal protection or fear further exposure to risk—particularly when the institution to which the complaint must be submitted is the very institution whose conduct is being challenged.

“Simultaneous pressures involving rights, property, identity, culture and freedom of movement place an excessive burden on a community that is unable to document every case. The consequence is not only unremedied harm, but also an absence of evidence that distorts official security assessments,” the report notes.

Gazimestan and Dren: Putting institutions to the test

The report analyzes the detention of 37 people following the Vidovdan commemoration at Gazimestan on June 28, 2026. Thirty-six of them received fines of EUR 700 each, while some were removed from Kosovo and prohibited from returning.

“One participant alleges that those detained were not given timely access to lawyers, telephone calls, water or toilets and that they were subjected to mistreatment. These allegations remain under investigation. Rather than asking readers to accept them as fact, the report asks whether the grounds for arrest were communicated, whether procedural rights were respected, whether the use of force was proportionate and whether the investigations were publicly concluded,” the Pupin Initiative states.

It adds that the Dren case demonstrates that oversight mechanisms can function.

“The Kosovo Police Inspectorate launched an investigation and recommended the suspension of two police officers—an institutional response acknowledged by the report. Nevertheless, only a completed and published legal outcome can restore trust. One transparent case is worth more than another statement,” the report says.

Security beyond incident numbers

Security is not limited to violence, the report notes.

“The 2016 Constitutional Court decision confirming the Visoki Decani Monastery’s ownership of 24 hectares was not implemented until 2024, demonstrating how guaranteed rights can remain ineffective without political will. Concerns extend to protective zones, church property, access to religious services, cemeteries and living religious communities,” the Pupin Initiative states.

Administrative pressure is even less visible, it adds.

“Unresolved civil status, the Law on Foreigners, property disputes, demolitions, institutional ‘integration’ and restrictions concerning Serbian symbols can transform everyday life without being classified as security incidents. The rejection of requests by Serbian judicial personnel to withdraw their 2022 resignations further restricts access to a justice system in which the community has confidence.”

KFOR — fragmented responsibility and immediate risk

The report acknowledges that KFOR is redeploying, rather than simply withdrawing, its forces and that it has announced increased activity in parts of northern Kosovo.

“The concern is who assumes responsibility at sensitive locations and how the effects of these changes are verified. If duties are transferred to institutions that already face complaints, while the EU, NATO, KFOR and Kosovo authorities share responsibility, no single actor assumes full accountability for the consequences. ‘Improved security’ then carries greater weight than the evidence supports,” the Pupin Initiative states.

Ahead of the judgment expected from the Kosovo Specialist Chambers on September 16, the report calls for preventive protection of Serbian communities, monasteries, cemeteries and returnee settlements.

It calls for a visible KFOR presence, EULEX and OSCE monitoring, the postponement of sensitive security changes and clear warnings against retaliation.

“Success should be measured by incidents prevented, not by responses after they occur,” the report states.

A rights-based action agenda

The report recommends independent verification of conditions before any further reduction in the security presence; measuring trust, underreporting, access to justice and the outcomes of proceedings; publishing data on KFOR deployments and response times; concluding investigations into the Gazimestan and Dren cases; restoring Serbian participation in the judiciary; establishing complaint channels outside the police chain of command; strengthening protection of the Serbian Orthodox Church; and separately monitoring administrative pressure.

Based on three testimonies, the report distinguishes verified facts from allegations that remain under investigation, acknowledges action by Kosovo institutions when they respond appropriately and does not prejudge ongoing proceedings.

Its conclusion, according to the Pupin Initiative, is non-partisan: the security of Serbs in Kosovo is not a bargaining chip in the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue, but a matter of existing constitutional and European rights.

“Verification, not assumptions, must become the basis of policy,” the report concludes.

According to the Pupin Initiative, the report seeks to deepen understanding of the legal, security, administrative and religious-freedom challenges facing the Serbian community in Kosovo, while directly calling on the European Union, EULEX, the OSCE, KFOR, the US Embassy and institutions in Kosovo to respond through preventive, transparent and independently verifiable action.