The story · written by gpt-6,
Serbia’s Supreme Court upheld Senad Makaji’s three-year prison sentence on 25 January 2024 for holding about 372 grams of cannabis for personal use. The court accepted application of the large-quantity offence, under which the intended personal use did not remove liability.
The smaller-personal-possession rule had two conditions
The 2009 amendment created a separate offence for a smaller quantity held for personal use. It prescribed a fine or up to three years and allowed punishment to be waived.
Both the quantity and the purpose appeared in that wording. The provision gave no cannabis amount in grams, leaving the application of “smaller quantity” to the case.
For eligible offences, prosecutors can also defer prosecution while a suspect completes accepted obligations, such as a payment for public purposes, community work or treatment. Successful compliance can lead to dismissal of the complaint.
The appeal changed thirteen months into three years
The trial court had sentenced Makaji to one year and one month under the smaller-personal-possession offence. Following the prosecutor’s appeal, the appeal court applied the large-quantity offence and increased the sentence to three years.
His lawyer argued that the cannabis was for personal use and that his dependence should matter when assessing the quantity. The Supreme Court rejected the challenge.
The judgment upheld the longer classification even though the established facts described personal use. It treated the quantity as the controlling issue for the offence applied on appeal.
The larger-stock offence had been added in 2019
The 2019 amendment had introduced three to ten years for unauthorised possession of a large quantity. Its wording did not require an intention to sell.
It also prevented a prison sentence for that offence from being served through the code’s home-detention arrangement. The smaller-personal-possession offence retained its fine, possible imprisonment and waiver options.
The two offences consequently exposed a person holding cannabis to different punishment depending on how the quantity was classified. Personal consumption alone did not settle which wording applied.
Judges assess a large quantity in each case
The Supreme Court said the meaning of a large quantity was a factual question for the court in each case. Its decision upheld the assessment made for Makaji’s cannabis stock.
The case forms part of Serbia’s current legal picture, where small personal possession, larger stocks, cultivation and supply have separate penalties. The statutory distinction can turn a personal cannabis case into one carrying a three-year minimum.[1][2][3][4][5]
Listed for context. No score change is recorded for Serbia here.
References
- Serbia Supreme Court — Kzz 27/2024, judgment of 25 January 2024Senad Makaji; about 372 g cannabis; appeal increased thirteen months to three years; large-quantity offence applies despite personal use; quantity assessed case by casearchived
- Serbia National Assembly — Criminal Code amendment, Gazette 35/2019Articles 21–23 and 42: cultivation raised to two–eight years; large possession three–ten years; commencement 1 December 2019archived
- Serbia — Criminal Code, current consolidated text reproduced by ParagrafArticles 246, 246a and 247: production/supply, cultivation, personal and large possession, and facilitating another person’s consumptionarchived
- Serbia Constitutional Court — Bulletin 2/2009Printed pages 62–64, especially p. 63: former drug offence, existing personal-use waiver and 11 September 2009 separation into two offencesarchived
- First Basic Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade — frequently asked questionsWhat is deferred prosecution? Explanation of Criminal Procedure Code article 283: fine/up-to-five-year offences, accepted obligations, up to one year and dismissal after compliancearchived
Checked. The date and the event were compared with a source that was read.