'WHAT IS HAPPENING TODAY, MY PEOPLE'? Branko Babić reacts to new information about the "sound cannon": How easy it is to accuse someone of a crime he did not commit

In late March 2026, new developments have emerged regarding the so-called “sound cannon” incident linked to protests in Belgrade in early 2025. The investigation has taken a significant turn after the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office in Belgrade uncovered evidence suggesting that the narrative surrounding the use of a sound cannon was planned months before the actual demonstration on March 15, 2025. This revelation has sparked renewed interest and scrutiny into the events that led to the tragic death of student Milica Živković during the protest.

The initial focus of the investigation centered around the circumstances of Milica's death, which occurred on March 26, 2025, when pyrotechnic devices were set off on the fifth floor of the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Belgrade. However, as the probe progressed, authorities discovered documents indicating that discussions about the potential use of a sound cannon had already taken place in January 2025. These discussions were part of a meeting held by the organization “Students in Blockade – Roof Working Group for Security” (KRBG). During this meeting, participants reportedly discussed how the use of a sound cannon could provoke a mass reaction from Brussels and referenced practices observed in China where people would move aside upon hearing such devices.

According to the findings of the Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office, these discussions were not merely hypothetical but were followed by actions aimed at simulating the use of a sound cannon by state organs during the planned protest. The intention behind these actions, according to the prosecutors, was to create panic among the public and incite unrest, potentially leading to violent changes in the constitutional order and threatening national security. As a result, the office has requested the Criminal Police Department and the Anti-Terrorism Unit to gather information on whether individuals involved in the KRBG meeting had committed any criminal acts related to inciting violence or undermining the country’s stability.

The discovery of these documents has raised serious questions about the motives behind the spread of misinformation and the role of certain groups in creating a climate of fear and distrust. The Higher Public Prosecutor’s Office has emphasized that while the use of a sound cannon was never confirmed, the planning and dissemination of false narratives appear to have been deliberate and coordinated.

Following these revelations, political figures and public commentators have expressed their views on the implications of the findings. Milenko Jovanov, leader of the parliamentary group of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), stated that the majority of Serbia now demands answers and accountability. He criticized the efforts made to dehumanize President Aleksandar Vučić and undermine the state, noting that attempts to obstruct the investigation at the Faculty of Philosophy and the University Rectorate failed. According to Jovanov, the fabricated story about the sound cannon was intended to provoke a reaction from Brussels and gain support from individuals like Picule, who were complicit in spreading the falsehoods and attempting to incite civil war in Serbia.

Branko Babić, a businessman and public figure, also commented on the situation, expressing confusion over the recent developments. In a social media address, he questioned why the police had entered the faculty and removed documentation following Milica’s death. He pointed out that the discussion about the sound cannon began two months prior to the March 15 protest, with students in the blockade asserting that a response from Brussels would be massive if the government used such a device. Babić suggested that the narrative was crafted to manipulate public sentiment and create tension within society, using the tragedy of Milica’s death as a catalyst.

He further noted that the media portrayal of President Vučić as a villain who had turned against his people was misleading and lacked empathy. Babić argued that it was easier to accuse someone of a crime they did not commit than to develop a coherent plan or write a program. He highlighted the emotional responses seen in the public sphere after the protest, emphasizing the need for anger and outrage rather than despair.

As the investigation continues, more details are likely to emerge regarding the extent of the planning and coordination behind the alleged sound cannon narrative. The involvement of various individuals and organizations remains under scrutiny, and the legal consequences for those found responsible could be significant. The broader implications of these findings will also influence the political landscape in Serbia, shaping public perception and potentially affecting future policies and reforms.