Serbian Law Amendments Won't Guarantee Fairer Elections, Watchdog Warns

Serbia's National Assembly concluded a public hearing on proposed amendments to the Law on Financing Political Activities. Miroslav Petrašinović, a Member of Parliament from the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), stated that the proposed changes fulfill the requirements of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) and the opposition. However, Pavle Dimitrijević from the election monitoring organization CRTA expressed doubt that the adoption of these amendments, even in their best form, will lead to a more effective electoral process.

Dimitrijević, speaking on N1 television, acknowledged that the amendments address all ODIHR proposals and identified issues. Yet, he stressed that the proposed solutions are incomplete and require further work. He pointed out that the public hearings were premature and that significant shortcomings remain, particularly concerning impunity, deadlines for the Anti-Corruption Agency's actions, document submission for involved parties, reducing campaign spending limits, regulating loans and debt, and stricter rules on the misuse of regular operational funds for election purposes.

“

Even if all these changes are adopted in their best version, they do not guarantee that we will have a better and higher quality electoral process, nor that the actors will behave differently.

He assessed that considerable work is still needed on these laws, suggesting the proposer is rushing the process. "Even if all these changes are adopted in their best version, they do not guarantee that we will have a better and higher quality electoral process, nor that the actors will behave differently," Dimitrijević stated.

“

In a country that has problems with access to justice, with the judiciary in general, what is the point of establishing rules if electoral actors will selectively apply them again, and institutions will selectively decide on them?

Regarding campaign financing limits, Dimitrijević warned that various methods can be used to circumvent such rules. He questioned which costs would be reported, what would be organized by the parties themselves versus third parties, and whether financing or campaign management by third parties would be properly reported to the Anti-Corruption Agency. He suggested that such activities might be fragmented into small, unreported contributions or promotions.

Dimitrijević identified the selective application of laws and selective judicial decision-making as the core problems. "In a country that has problems with access to justice, with the judiciary in general, what is the point of establishing rules if electoral actors will selectively apply them again, and institutions will selectively decide on them?" he asked. His main impression is that "all the rules will be established, and everyone will continue to behave the same way."

“

My main impression is that all the rules will be established, and everyone will continue to behave the same way.