After assasination of the Serbian Prime Minister, Zoran Djindjić, during "SABER" police operation (from March 12, till April 22, 2003 when the state of emergency was lifted) the abolishing of human rights and procedural guarantees was unconstitutional.

Nakon atentata na srpskog premijera Zorana Đinđića u policijskoj akciji SABLJA - koja je trajala od 12.03. do ukidanja vanrednog stanja 22.04.2003., neustavno ukinute građanske slobode i procesna prava.

During the "SABER" operation, some 11,665 people were brought into custody, 2,700 were detained, and 4,000 people were charged.… However, contrary to the law, the Constitution and accepted international conventions, basic human rights and even the right to they have a defence attorney present were suspended. That was the reason for the Democracy Develompemt Foundation to address the Constitutional Court of Serbia on March 12, 2003 to have the the application of the disputed regulations suspended for as long as the the court proceedings is pending.

After the assassination of the Prime Minister of Serbia Zoran Đinđić, on March 12, 2003, the Acting President of the Republic of Serbia, Natasa Mićić, declared a state of emergency in Serbia, which lasted until April 22, 2003. During the mass arrests, regulations guaranteeing the exercise of basic human rights were suspended. (Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Declaration of Human Rights, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as other international acts guaranteeing human rights and freedoms).

So, Democracy Development Foundation filed motion with the Constitutional Court of Serbia to initiate an urgent procedure and determine that Articles 15b, 15c and 15d of the Law on Organization and Competences of State Bodies in Combating Organized Crime (Official Gazette of RS, No. 42 / 2002-39 / 2003) and the Criminal Procedure Code are violating the binding regulations.

The cited articles stipulated:

that the detainee does not have to be brought before an investigating judge; that deprivation of liberty may last up to nine months; that the detained person is not brought to court during that period; that the defense counsel may be denied the right to inspect the investigation files; that detention may be ordered in the Special Detention Unit for a period of 3 months; that the Minister of the Interior may extend this detention for another 30 days; that a judge of the Special Division may order a custody of 3 months; that no right of appeal of preventively detained or detained persons was stipulated…

According to the assessment of the Constitutional Court, it was made probable that the application of the disputed provisions could cause irreparable harmful consequences, so on June 5, 2003. the Court passed RESOLUTION I U-166/2003 in which it rules:

"The execution of individual acts and actions that have been undertaken pursuant to Art. 15c, 15d and 15d of the Law on Organization and Competences of State Bodies in the Suppression of Organized Crime (Official Gazette of the RS, No. 42 / 2002-39 / 2003) is being suspended until the final decision of the Constitutional Court is returned. " Link (RESOLUTION I U-166/2003)

Six years later, on July 6th, 2007 the Constitutional Court rendered a DECISION, stating under item 3: “The procedure for assessing the constitutionality of Art. 15b, 15c and 15d, 15d and 15d of the Law on Organization and Competences of State Bodies in the Suppression of Organized Crime is being stopped”(Official Gazette of the RS, No. 42 / 2002-39 / 2003), Link (DECISION I U-166/2003)