SERBIA: ‘We Are Becoming an Electoral Autocracy, a System Where the Government Cannot Lose’

Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić has faced mounting pressure from mass protests demanding the restoration of the rule of law, leading him to announce on 27 June 2026 that he would resign within weeks and call for early presidential and parliamentary elections. However, concerns persist among civil society groups that the timing and conditions surrounding these elections may allow Vučić to retain influence, potentially transitioning into the role of prime minister. The ruling Serbian Progressive Party has taken steps to undermine the fairness of the electoral process, while civil society organizations advocating for transparency and accountability have encountered legal harassment, police raids, and smear campaigns. These developments have further complicated Serbia's aspirations for European Union (EU) membership, as the government strengthens its ties with China and Russia. The initial response from Vučić came after sustained demonstrations that lasted over a year, during which citizens demanded greater adherence to democratic principles and the rule of law. Despite his commitment to hold early elections in 2026, the lack of a specific date for dissolving parliament or his resignation has fueled speculation about his potential return to power in a different capacity. Vučić appears to be deliberately prolonging the timeline to ensure that when elections eventually take place, his party will not face a credible threat of losing. In parallel, the government has implemented measures aimed at eroding the foundations of competitive elections. Independent media outlets have come under increasing pressure, with reports indicating efforts to suppress their operations. University professors who voiced support for student-led protests have reportedly been dismissed, and justice officials demonstrating independence have been replaced by individuals perceived as more aligned with the government. Intensified hate campaigns targeting civil society, journalists, opposition parties, and students have further contributed to an atmosphere of hostility toward dissenting voices. The overarching strategy seems clear: to conduct elections only after creating an environment where the outcome is predetermined. The erosion of democratic norms in Serbia is evident in the growing absence of genuine electoral competition. A functioning democracy necessitates the possibility of a government losing an election, but Vučić is constructing a system where this scenario becomes improbable. Each delay in scheduling elections provides additional opportunity for consolidating control and diminishing avenues for independent expression. The implications of such a shift are profound, signaling a move towards an electoral autocracy where the government is shielded from defeat. Challenges facing elections in Serbia include the deliberate misapplication and selective enforcement of laws designed to manipulate electoral outcomes. Voter intimidation has intensified, accompanied by more sophisticated forms of political clientelism and the misuse of public resources. Reports indicate instances of physical attacks on election observers, with police present but seemingly unresponsive. While formal elections continue to occur, the integrity of the process is significantly compromised. Electoral corruption manifests in various ways, often involving organized crime and institutional capture, all protected by a culture of impunity. Civil society organizations have become targets of systemic attacks. Fourteen months prior, police conducted a raid on one organization's office, staying for 28 hours and copying nearly 10,000 pages of financial documents. State-controlled media portrayed the group as a “criminal gang of foreign mercenaries money-laundering millions of dollars.” Similar actions were taken against three other civil society organizations in Belgrade on the same day. Despite these incidents, there has been no follow-up from the prosecutor’s office, raising doubts about the legitimacy of the accusations. The ongoing assault extends beyond physical threats, encompassing broader narratives aimed at discrediting and marginalizing these groups.