URGENT FOLLOW-UP TO OUR APPEAL OF 29 AUGUST 2026
Announced State and Military Honours for Ratko Mladić
Request for clarification, accountability and appropriate consequences
7 September 2026
Copies sent to: European External Action Service · EU Delegation to Serbia · EU Delegation to Bosnia and Herzegovina and EU Special Representative · European Parliament · Council of Europe · Office of the High Representative · International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals
To the European Commission,
On 29 August 2026, we addressed an urgent appeal to European and international institutions following the announcement that Ratko Mladić would receive State and military honours in connection with his funeral.
We called for preventive action, the documentation of institutional and individual responsibility, and appropriate political consequences should public authorities proceed with official or institutionally supported glorification.
The funeral took place in Belgrade on 7 September 2026. The risk identified in our original appeal was neither speculative nor overstated.
Ratko Mladić's body was transported to Serbia aboard a Serbian government aircraft, accompanied by Serbian Justice Minister Nenad Vujić. Serbian Armed Forces personnel received and carried the coffin, which was covered with the flags of the Republic of Serbia and Republika Srpska.
A commemorative ceremony was also held on 5 September at the Serbian Armed Forces Central Military Club (Dom Vojske) — an official military venue. It was attended by Minister Vujić and senior representatives of Republika Srpska, including its President, Siniša Karan.
During the funeral and burial on 7 September, soldiers stood guard around the coffin, Serbian army personnel carried it, a military orchestra performed, and a ceremonial gun salute was fired.
These facts are incompatible with the suggestion that no military honours or meaningful State involvement occurred.
Attendance by serving public officials
Publicly available reporting and images document the attendance of at least the following serving members of the Government of Serbia:
- Bratislav Gašić, Minister of Defence;
- Nenad Vujić, Minister of Justice;
- Nikola Selaković, Minister of Culture;
- Darko Glišić, Minister for Public Investment;
- Milica Đurđević Stamenkovski, Minister of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs; and
- Nenad Popović, Minister without portfolio.
The funeral was also attended by Danilo Vučić, son of Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić. President Vučić himself did not attend. As no official designation has yet been identified, we do not assert that Danilo Vučić formally represented the President. His presence should nevertheless be recorded separately from that of serving government officials.
Officials and political office-holders from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republika Srpska reported as present included:
- Siniša Karan, President of Republika Srpska;
- Savo Minić, Prime Minister of Republika Srpska;
- Željka Cvijanović, Serb member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina;
- Nenad Stevandić, President of the National Assembly of Republika Srpska;
- Željko Budimir, Minister of the Interior of Republika Srpska;
- Milorad Dodik, President of the Alliance of Independent Social Democrats;
- Draško Stanivuković, Mayor of Banja Luka;
- Branko Blanuša, President of the Serbian Democratic Party;
- Marinko Božović, Serbian Democratic Party official; and
- Aleksandar Vranješ, Ambassador of Bosnia and Herzegovina to Serbia.
The presence of Aleksandr Botsan-Kharchenko, Ambassador of the Russian Federation to Serbia, was also publicly documented.
The religious service was led by Patriarch Porfirije, head of the Serbian Orthodox Church.
This attendance cannot be dismissed as merely private without examining the capacity in which each official participated, whether institutional representation was involved, and whether public resources were used.
The European Commission's position requires clarification
When questioned about the funeral, European Commission spokesperson Paula Pinho stated: "We heard that a funeral with State honours had been planned, but that did not happen."
When journalists asked how this conclusion could be reconciled with the involvement of State institutions, military personnel, government ministers and official symbols, the spokesperson reportedly replied that it was for Serbia to decide how the funeral should be organised and reiterated the Commission's general opposition to the glorification of war criminals and genocide denial.
This response does not address the central issue raised in our appeal.
The question is not merely whether the Serbian authorities formally designated the event as a "State funeral." Nor can the assessment depend exclusively upon terminology selected by the same authorities whose conduct is under scrutiny.
The relevant question is whether State institutions, officials, military personnel, premises, symbols or public resources were used to facilitate, endorse or confer official legitimacy upon the commemoration and burial of a person finally convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war.
The absence of a formal label cannot erase documented State involvement.
The preventive stage has passed; accountability must now follow
Our appeal of 29 August identified four concrete objectives:
- preventing official State and military glorification;
- preventing its permanent institutionalisation;
- documenting institutional and individual political responsibility; and
- ensuring appropriate consequences if public officials proceeded.
The funeral has now taken place. The third and fourth objectives must therefore be activated without delay, while the risk of permanent institutionalisation remains.
We accordingly ask the competent European and international institutions to:
- clarify publicly the factual and legal criteria used to conclude that the funeral was not conducted with State or military honours;
- request from the Serbian authorities a complete account of the involvement of the Government of Serbia, the Serbian Armed Forces, State protocol, the Central Military Club and any other public institution;
- establish who authorised, organised or financed the government aircraft, military premises, military personnel, orchestra, gun salute, official symbols, security arrangements, organised transport and other public resources connected with the transfer, commemoration and burial;
- clarify whether the six serving Serbian government ministers attended in a private or official capacity and whether their participation involved public resources, official transport, security arrangements or institutional representation;
- document the officials from Republika Srpska and Bosnia and Herzegovina who attended, the capacities in which they acted and whether their attendance involved public financing or institutional representation;
- clarify whether Aleksandar Vranješ attended in his official capacity as Ambassador of Bosnia and Herzegovina to Serbia and whether his attendance had been authorised by Bosnia and Herzegovina's competent institutions;
- assess the substance of State involvement rather than relying solely upon the formal designation given to the ceremony by Serbian authorities;
- record the relevant conduct in EU accession reporting, political dialogue and other applicable EU, Council of Europe and United Nations monitoring processes;
- consider appropriate political and diplomatic consequences for responsible public officials and institutions and, where an existing lawful restrictive-measures framework and the required evidentiary threshold apply, targeted measures against responsible individuals or entities; and
- continue monitoring any official monument, recurring ceremony, public financing or commemorative infrastructure that could transform the burial site or Mladić's legacy into a permanent institutionally supported site of glorification.
Implications for Serbia's EU accession process
The European Commission has repeatedly stated that the glorification of war criminals, genocide denial and historical revisionism are incompatible with the fundamental values of the European Union and have no place in the EU or in candidate countries.
Those principles must have practical meaning.
We therefore ask whether the Commission will take these events into account in its assessment of Serbia's accession process, particularly regarding:
- alignment with the values set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;
- the rule of law and respect for final international judgments;
- transitional justice and reconciliation;
- good-neighbourly relations and regional cooperation; and
- the credibility of Serbia's stated commitment to the European project.
A candidate country cannot be permitted to mobilise government ministers, public resources, military institutions, armed forces personnel and official symbols in connection with the commemoration of a person convicted of genocide, while avoiding scrutiny merely by declining to use the formal expression "State funeral."
Reconciliation cannot be reduced to declarations
For victims, survivors and their families, this is neither a semantic dispute nor a question of ceremonial protocol.
It concerns the protection of judicial truth, the dignity of victims and the willingness of European institutions to apply their declared principles when confronted with institutional glorification.
For more than three decades, survivors, victims' families, returnees and civil society in Bosnia and Herzegovina have been asked to contribute to coexistence and reconciliation. That burden cannot continually be imposed upon those who survived the crimes while public institutions facilitate or legitimise the glorification of those finally convicted for committing them.
Our warning of 29 August was clear. The events have now taken place. What is required is an evidence-based assessment, institutional accountability and an appropriate response.
We respectfully request a written reply addressing the specific questions and requests set out above.
Yours faithfully,