Serbia's election laws riddled with loopholes, officials campaign with impunity: Transparency Serbia

Transparency Serbia, a leading watchdog organization, has sharply criticized the current state of election campaign regulations in Serbia, pointing to gaping loopholes that undermine fair electoral processes. Zlatko Minić, representing the organization, argues that a "famous authentic interpretation" of the Law on Prevention of Corruption from several years ago has effectively stripped many public officials of their status, allowing them to campaign freely without fear of repercussions.

“

Thanks to the famous authentic interpretation of the Law on Prevention of Corruption from a few years ago, where many public officials lost that status, now you have directors of RFZO and PIO fund, directors of health centers appointed by the minister, going and doing what they want in the campaign, not being public officials and unable to answer for any violation in the campaign before the Anti-Corruption Agency.

This legal ambiguity means that directors of health centers and pension funds, appointed by ministers, can actively participate in campaigns without being classified as public officials. Consequently, they are not accountable to the Anti-Corruption Agency for any potential violations. Minić likens the process of reporting these transgressions to "sport fishing" – where violations are identified and reported by organizations like Transparency Serbia, but the relevant authorities then "release the fish," failing to take meaningful action.

Furthermore, Minić highlighted the inadequacy of sanctions, noting that most violations result in mere "warning measures" rather than substantive penalties. Even when the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) was found to have violated the law during recent local elections, the consequences were minimal. The lack of accountability for officials, in particular, is a major concern, as they often operate with impunity.

“

We are the fishermen who find these violations of the law and file a report, and then the competent authority that should act on that report releases the fish.

The issue of "official campaigning" remains a significant problem, with laws failing to provide clear restrictions or prohibitions for public officials, beyond the misuse of public resources. The regulation of social media use during campaigns is also poorly defined, leading to instances where public enterprise directors use official platforms to praise government achievements and implicitly or explicitly endorse ruling party lists. The Anti-Corruption Agency's response in such cases, often involving requests for explanations that are easily deflected, is seen as insufficient. Minić concludes that the agency's role has become one of passive observation, failing to identify and address systemic abuses, leaving regulations "full of holes" and those responsible for enforcing them "happy when they can do nothing."

“

How many loopholes in the law, and the one who should take care of them is happy when he can do nothing.