Transparency Serbia: Nearly a Billion Euros for Votes
Transparency Serbia says the October 25 vote comes under worse conditions than 2023, with almost a billion euros set aside, against 430 million before the last election.
The watchdog group Transparency Serbia said on September 8 that the election called for October 25 will be held under conditions considerably worse than those in 2023, despite several laws relevant to the election process having been amended in the meantime.
According to the organization’s statement, a number of key recommendations from the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) were never even attempted, either in regulations or in how state bodies, the ruling party and public officials actually behave. Transparency Serbia says this is especially true of the recommendation on pressure on voters and pre-election handouts to various categories of citizens.
Nearly a Billion Euros, Double the 2023 Figure
The central figure in the statement is the amount set aside in the budget revision for what Transparency Serbia calls the purchase of support.
“For this purchase of support, the budget revision has set aside almost a billion euros, while around 430 million euros were handed out before the 2023 election,” Transparency Serbia said in its statement.
The gap between the two figures, the organization argues, shows directly how much larger the pre-election spending spree has grown compared with the previous cycle, one that already drew criticism at the time.
The group also addressed the new cap on campaign spending, which it does not consider adequate.
“A spending limit has finally been set, but at an absurdly high level, six million euros for parliamentary elections, which is double what comparable countries allow,” the statement reads.
Oversight That Doesn’t Investigate Proactively
Transparency Serbia says recent amendments to the Anti-Corruption Law will do little to rein in campaigning by officials, since, in its view, nothing was done to make penalties for violating that law and the Law on Financing Political Activities more precise, tougher or applicable to every kind of violation.
The organization warns that the problem is not only the rules themselves but also how the responsible bodies enforce them.
“Even if the laws were perfect, that would count for very little when the key bodies, the Anti-Corruption Agency and the public prosecutor’s offices, fail to proactively investigate violations, fail to establish all the facts even after receiving complaints, or issue warnings instead of launching criminal proceedings,” Transparency Serbia said.
From Local Elections to October
Transparency Serbia places its assessment of the October election in a continuous line with the local elections held in 2024, 2025 and 2026, which, according to the organization, were marked by pressure on voters and the greatest blending yet of party and state.
“The local elections held in 2024, 2025 and 2026 were marked by pressure on voters and an unprecedented blending of party and state,” the statement says.
According to data our newsroom has previously reported, the pre-election mood ahead of the October date has also been marked by disputed polling: a Faktor plus survey put the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) at 47.2 percent, while BIRODI challenged the methodology behind the turnout estimates.
The Government Claims the Opposite
Transparency Serbia’s assessment collides head on with the position the government took in its explanation for dissolving parliament. Outgoing Prime Minister Djuro Macut said the government had made an enormous effort in the preceding period to further improve election conditions and legislation, in particular by taking ODIHR’s recommendations into account.
Transparency Serbia directly disputes that claim. Its own findings show no attempt was made to change either the regulations or the practice around the key recommendations, and the organization concludes that the government’s claims of improved election conditions do not hold up against the facts.
Between now and October 25, the date set for the vote, it remains an open question whether the Anti-Corruption Agency and the public prosecutor’s offices will change the approach the organization is now criticizing, or whether oversight of campaign financing will stay exactly as it was before the last election.
