The State v. Milan T. (2016) was the first major prosecution under the Digital Vigilance Act (the popular name for the 2015 State Security Act). A Sinj University student, docketed as Milan T., was convicted of digital sedition for rooting a YakaPhone to install unauthorised software — but served no prison term after Republic for All (RzA) secured a suspended sentence.
Background
After 2015, the state required KresiX-compliant handsets and treated unauthorised firmware as a security offence. Milan T. installed a generic calculator application absent from the State Repository. Prosecutors framed the root as an attack on the surveillance pipeline; RzA argued the software was harmless and that mandatory YakaSys hardware violated competition principles under the 1988 State Enterprise Act.
Holding
The Inferior Tribunal returned a guilty verdict on digital sedition but accepted RzA’s mitigation: sentence suspended, no incarceration. Device forfeiture and supervised compliance conditions applied. The case drew national attention as proof that Vigilance enforcement would reach ordinary students, not only organised dissidents.
Legacy
Milan T. set the procedural pattern later hardened in The State v. “User 449” (2019), where Daemon evidence produced a full five-year term. Civil-liberties advocates cite the suspended sentence as a rare early win; security hardliners treat the conviction itself as the holding that mattered. Catalogue: Landmark Cases.