Interviews on Femicide
The following discussions were recorded for the article “The Crime Serbia’s System Won’t Name: FEMICIDE” by Maja Vujović, EP’s Serbia Correspondent.
Vanja Macanović, lawyer, working with victims of violence for over a decade, Autonomous Women’s Center Belgrade
Vanja Macanović is a lawyer and a member of the Autonomous Women’s Center (AŽC) since 2005. She coordinates the center’s legal aid service, which provides free legal assistance to women who are survivors of various forms of intimate partner, domestic, and sexual violence. She is an alumna of the Women’s Human Rights Institute (2009–2011), a former member of the Observatory of the European Women’s Lobby (2012–2019), and a former member of the Gender Equality Council of the Ombudsman of Serbia (2012–2018).
Macanović is actively involved in proposing and monitoring national laws and policies. She is a co-author of AŽC reports submitted to the UN CEDAW and CRC Committees, the Council of Europe GREVIO Committee, and the prEUgovor coalition’s Alarm reports on Serbia’s EU accession progress. She also designs and delivers training for professionals in the judiciary, police, and social welfare centers, focusing on violence against women and children, coordinated institutional response, and risk assessment.
Aleksandra Mirimanov, activist, Women for Change
Aleksandra Mirimanov is an art pedagogue, project manager, and committed activist with extensive experience supporting marginalized and vulnerable groups — including refugees, users of psychiatric services, and children without parental care. She holds a degree in Fine Arts – Painting, from the Academy of Arts in Novi Sad, and has completed three years of education in Integrative Art Psychotherapy. Her professional development includes specialized training in child welfare, trauma-informed care, and gender studies.
Aleksandra is a member of the informal activist collective Women for Change and serves as co-president of the gender equality group within the local Bravo movement. Her work is deeply rooted in both personal and community-based care, reflected in her role as a devoted mother to a teenager.
Dr. Kosana Beker, Fem Platz, initiator of the Regional Initiative “Together Against Femicide”
Kosana Beker earned her PhD at the Center for Gender Studies of the Association of Centers for Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (ACIMSI) at the University of Novi Sad. She completed her master’s degree in Gender Studies at the University for Peace, Costa Rica (UN-mandated University for Peace), and previously graduated from the Faculty of Law at the University of Belgrade, where she also passed the bar exam.
For many years, she has been engaged in human rights and the prohibition of discrimination, with a particular focus on the rights of women, children, and persons with disabilities. She is the author of numerous papers, publications, and research in the fields of anti-discrimination law and human rights. She currently works as the program director of the women’s association FemPlatz and as a consultant in the areas of anti-discrimination and gender equality.
She previously worked as an assistant to the Commissioner for Equality Protection of the Republic of Serbia, and has also been employed at the institution of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Serbia. She has extensive experience working in the civil sector.
From 2013 to 2016, she was a member of the Executive Board of Equinet – the European Network of Equality Bodies, and since 2017, she has been a member of ANED, the European Academic Network of Experts in Disability.
QUESTION 1 (Dr Beker): Dr Beker, as the initiator of the regional “Together Against Femicide” initiative, what are the most significant similarities and differences you’ve observed in the legal frameworks and societal responses to femicide across the Western Balkan countries involved in the initiative? What key lessons can Serbia learn from the experiences of other nations in the region?
As for our regional initiative, “Together Against Femicide,” it stemmed from the research we conducted. First, we did research on the judicial practices related to femicides and attempted femicides over a five-year period in Serbia. We gathered all the available judgments and analyzed them. Then we did the same in Albania and Montenegro, and eventually, the opportunity arose. UN Women supported this for these three countries, and later, together with the service center, we also worked on Bosnia, North Macedonia, and Kosovo. So, in the end, we have conducted very similar analyses for all six jurisdictions of the Western Balkans. And since we saw that the problems were similar everywhere, we decided to try to unite regionally. What is important is that all these jurisdictions actually have solid legal frameworks, which of course can always be improved, but considering that we advocate for introducing femicide as a separate criminal offense, what I can say is that there is already the possibility to properly qualify femicides and prosecute them, just as if we had a specific criminal offense for femicide. Meanwhile, while we were conducting this research, North Macedonia amended its criminal code, and now they have a crime that is not called femicide, but is classified as a serious murder. The same thing happened in Croatia, which we did not research. Recently, they introduced the serious murder of a woman, and that is something that would also be suitable for our legal system.
What we saw during this research is that there are similarities. Of course, there are always differences, each system is specific, but we decided to focus on the similarities, and what is common to all these countries in the region is that femicides are often not qualified adequately. In criminal law, if a crime is not qualified properly, if it is classified as a regular murder or a spontaneous murder, as we saw in some of the cases in our sample, that automatically leads to lighter sentences. Another common issue is that mitigating circumstances are always found… First, mitigating circumstances are always found for the perpetrators, and second, these mitigating circumstances are completely irrelevant to the murder of a woman. For example, that he has poor health, or, for instance, in one case, we had a high school teacher. That is one problem. Another problem is that things that could only be aggravating circumstances are taken as mitigating ones. So, we have very bad examples where someone who murders his wife or partner is told that being a family man is a mitigating circumstance, or that being a participant in the war of the 1990s is a mitigating circumstance. These are all things that could only be considered aggravating circumstances in that context. And because of all this… And yes, we also noticed that femicide is viewed as an isolated incident. Rarely do judges realize that femicide is just the end of all the violence that the woman has somehow endured, and that these are not isolated events. This led us to try to unite and first introduce, if possible, for each country to advocate for femicide as a separate criminal offense. Another very important thing we are working on is establishing an independent body to monitor femicides, a so-called Femicide Watch or a control mechanism for monitoring femicide cases. This mechanism would mean that every femicide and every attempted femicide would be tracked, with all data being gathered to see what didn’t work in the entire system, as very often, the cooperation between the bodies responsible for the prevention and protection against violence does not function. It is common for everyone to do their job minimally and not cooperate, even though the law mandates cooperation. Then this mechanism could analyze, see where the bottlenecks are, and who is not doing their job properly, and where the cooperation problems lie, and make recommendations based on that.
The purpose of this body is not to punish anyone but to make recommendations and point out what needs to be improved in order to enhance violence prevention and protection. Once such bodies are established in our countries, our idea is to have a regional Femicide Watch, where annual data from each of these national Femicide Watches would be pooled, and then, at the regional level, we can advocate for improving the legal system. This is the basic idea. Now, what can Serbia learn from other countries? For example, it can start by doing what North Macedonia or Croatia did, and introduce a separate criminal offense, for example. In the laws of other countries, there are some solutions that are… that is, everyone has some good solutions. If these solutions were… if we sat down and agreed, they could be transferred to other systems because all our legal systems are very similar, especially since we all come from the former Yugoslavia and share the same kind of legal system. So, I believe we have a lot to learn from each other and that together we could exert more pressure and harmonize the changes.
QUESTION 2 (Dr Beker): Fem Platz’s work often bridges research and advocacy. Based on your extensive research, what are the most frequent and most critical systemic failures in Serbia that contribute to the ongoing prevalence of femicide, and what specific steps do you consider most urgent to address these failures at the national level?
Now, as for the question of what is most urgent and what the shortcomings are. I’ve already mentioned the shortcomings: it is bad that crimes are usually poorly qualified, and the prosecution and courts, as well as all other entities in the chain, have gender stereotypes and prejudices, which is often visible during the proceedings, sometimes even in the reasoning of the judgments. I don’t know what would be most urgent, since from my point of view, everything is urgent, but let’s say that the most important thing is that women are believed, that integrated and coordinated support is provided, and that the services available to women in situations of violence are improved, as well as the cooperation of authorities, including the police, social services, prosecution, and NGOs that provide support, which are often sidelined, and of course the health and education systems. There should be better, easier, and faster cooperation, and this would contribute to better prevention and protection against violence.
QUESTION 3 (Dr Beker): The “Together Against Femicide” initiative emphasizes regional collaboration. What are the main challenges and successes you’ve encountered in fostering this cross-border cooperation, and how can this regional solidarity be further leveraged to strengthen the fight against femicide in Serbia?
With this regional initiative, we started last year. We all agree with what is written in the “Together Against Femicide” declaration. But this is essentially just the beginning. This year we continue, and we will see how we can expand it. Our goal is to learn from each other in the region, exchange practices, see where mistakes have been made, so that other systems don’t repeat them. However, we are NGOs. It presents a challenge for us even to organize a regional forum, which we have managed to organize for the second time, and we hope to have a third one this year. These things are related to costs. We are not government bodies, so we can’t just pay without problem. So, we even have such seemingly trivial issues, which are not trivial for us at all. But what we do know is that this year we continue to deepen this initiative and agree on the next steps. What I know for sure is that we will exchange and analyze what has changed in the past year and see if there are examples of new good practices, and we will try to promote them within each country and take some new steps that we can take together.
Vanja Petrović, MA, feminist, non-binary activist, and doctoral student in Social Policy and Social Work
Vanja Petrović, MA, is a non-binary activist, independent researcher, and a doctoral student in Social Policy at the Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Belgrade. Their fields of interest and research include the history of local feminism, abolitionist feminism, and solidarity-based, non-hierarchical organizing. Vanja is also one of the co-founders of the abolitionist Novi Sad Feminist Collective (NS FAK), and the author for the feminist portal Vox Feminae. (Edited)
QUESTION: How could abolitionist feminism contribute to reducing violence against women, and what specific changes should be implemented to achieve transformative justice?
Prof. Dr. Nevena Petrušić, professor at the Faculty of Law, was Serbia’s first Commissioner for Protection of Equality
Professor Dr. Nevena Petrušić graduated from the Faculty of Law in Niš in 1981. She defended her master’s thesis titled “Proceedings in Disputes Arising from Parent-Child Relations” at the Faculty of Law in Niš in 1988, and her doctoral dissertation titled “Proceedings for the Division of Joint Property or Assets” in 1995, also at the Faculty of Law in Niš. She has been employed at the Faculty since 1982. In 2006, she was appointed Full Professor in the narrower scientific field of Civil Law at the Faculty of Law in Niš.
Throughout her professional career, Prof. Dr. Nevena Petrušić has published 5 textbooks, 10 monographs, 4 practice manuals, and 113 scholarly articles. She has participated, and continues to participate, in 14 research projects. She has also undergone professional training in several European countries and the United States.
Email Interview with prof. Dr. Nevena Petrušić
1. Professor Petrušić, drawing on your legal expertise and your experience as Serbia’s first Commissioner for Protection of Equality, how effectively do you believe the current Serbian legal framework addresses the specific issue of femicide? What are the most significant legal gaps or areas needing reform to better prevent and prosecute these crimes?
1. a) In your opinion, how do institutions respond to the demands of women’s organizations, experts, and activists for femicide to be criminalized as a separate criminal offense?
In Serbian law, femicide is not specifically criminalized; cases of women’s killings are categorized under various forms of homicide. Many women’s organizations and experts who research femicide advocate for its criminalization as a distinct form of aggravated murder. Our position is that such a legal qualification would acknowledge and recognize the unique nature of femicide — a crime rooted in the patriarchal matrix of male power and domination, and deeply entrenched in gender inequality. Criminalizing femicide in this way would ensure justice for the victims and their families and make it easier for judges to identify gender-based motives behind women’s killings.Additionally, it would prevent such killings from being classified as lesser forms of homicide — which, as we’ve seen in practice, often results in lighter sentences and inconsistent rulings in the prosecution and punishment of perpetrators. Unfortunately, this proposal has not been embraced by the working group tasked with amending the Criminal Code.
1. b) In denying femicide as a separate criminal offense, unfortunately, even the Ombudsman Zoran Pašalić has stood out. What is your opinion on his stance regarding this issue?
In his public statements, the Ombudsman has demonstrated a profound misunderstanding of the phenomenon of femicide—its structural causes, its gendered dimensions—as well as a lack of familiarity with international standards on combating and protecting against femicide and other forms of gender-based violence against women.
2. During your tenure as Commissioner, you likely gained significant insight into the implementation of anti-discrimination laws and the challenges in achieving gender equality in Serbia. In your opinion, how deeply ingrained are patriarchal attitudes and gender inequality in Serbian society, and what role do these play in perpetuating violence against women, ultimately leading to femicide?
Gender inequality continues to permeate all relationships in both the private and public spheres—and this is clearly reflected in statistical data. Here lie the root causes of violence against women, which often escalates into femicide. Therefore, any effective effort to combat femicide and violence against women must address these root causes. This means systematically working to dismantle gender stereotypes and prejudices, to transform patriarchal gender norms, to integrate gender perspectives into all state policies, and to promote and advance a culture of gender equality. It also means preventing all forms of discrimination against women.This is the only appropriate approach, because otherwise we will remain a society that continually “produces” violent men—something the late Marina Blagojević Hughson consistently warned us about.
3. Considering international human rights standards and best practices in other European countries, what specific legislative or policy changes would you advocate for in Serbia to strengthen the protection of women at risk of violence and to ensure a more effective justice system response to cases of femicide?
There is much to be done—not only legislatively, but also more broadly at the societal level. As for the legal framework, it can be said that it has improved significantly since 2002. However, there is still a need for further refinement—primarily, full alignment of criminal provisions related to gender-based violence with the definitions outlined in the Istanbul Convention, which Serbia has ratified.On the other hand, we need to strengthen the capacity of the criminal justice system to investigate, prosecute, and punish perpetrators of gender-based killings of women. This includes implementing training programs for professionals—especially those focused on overcoming gender stereotypes and institutional sexism—and those that enable adequate risk assessment for femicide.Authorities must understand that the state is obliged to provide a holistic response to violence against women, regardless of the form it takes or the context in which it occurs. Women and their needs must be placed at the center of all policies and actions. This requires adopting a strategic document and a national action plan that outlines a comprehensive policy and an effective system of measures for preventing violence against women, and for ensuring protection and support for survivors of gender-based violence.It is particularly important to establish effective early detection mechanisms for violence that could escalate into femicide. In 2021, Serbia adopted the Strategy for the Prevention and Elimination of Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence for the period 2021–2025. Women with direct experience working with survivors of violence participated in its drafting.Unfortunately, the accompanying action plans for implementing this strategy were never adopted—despite the fact that the strategy is set to expire this year. This, in itself, speaks volumes about the state’s actual commitment to seriously and fully addressing the prevention and suppression of violence against women.There is still much work ahead of us if we want a society in which women and girls are safe, and can enjoy all human rights equally with men.
