Observation of the early parliamentary elections in Serbia (16 March 2014)
Election observation report
| Doc. 13516
| 22 May 2014
- Author(s):
- Ad hoc Committee of the Bureau
- Rapporteur :
- Mr Pedro AGRAMUNT,
Spain, EPP/CD
1 Introduction
1. The Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly, at its
meeting on 27 January 2014, decided to observe the early parliamentary
elections in Serbia, subject to the receipt of an invitation and
confirmation of the date, and to constitute an ad hoc committee
composed of 22 members and the two co-rapporteurs of the Committee
on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States
of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee). The Bureau also
authorised a pre-electoral mission. On 30 January, Mr Nebojša Stefanović, President
of the National Assembly of Serbia, invited the Parliamentary Assembly
to observe the early parliamentary elections. The Bureau of the
Assembly, at its meeting on 31 January, approved the composition of
the ad hoc committee (see Appendix 1) and appointed Mr Pedro Agramunt
(Spain, EPP/CD) as Chairperson.
2. Under the terms of Article 15 of the co-operation agreement
signed between the Parliamentary Assembly and the European Commission
for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) on 4 October 2004,
“[w]hen the Bureau of the Assembly decides to observe an election
in a country in which electoral legislation was previously examined
by the Venice Commission, one of the rapporteurs of the Venice Commission
on this issue may be invited to join the Assembly's election observation
mission as legal adviser”. In accordance with this provision, the
Bureau of the Assembly invited an expert from the Venice Commission to
join the ad hoc committee as an advisor.
3. The pre-electoral delegation visited Serbia from 18 to 21
February 2014 to evaluate the state of preparations and the political
climate in the run-up to the early parliamentary elections on 16 March 2014.
The multiparty delegation was composed of Mr Pedro Agramunt (Spain,
EPP/CD), Head of the Delegation, Mr Igor Ivanovski, (“the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, SOC), Ms Ingebjørg Amanda Godskesen
(Norway, EDG) and Mr Grigore Petrenco (Republic of Moldova, UEL).
Unfortunately, one of the members of the pre-electoral delegation
and the two co-rapporteurs responsible for monitoring of Serbia
were unable to take part in the visit.
4. During its visit to Serbia, the delegation met Prime Minister
and Interior Minister Ivica Dačić, Nebojša Stefanović, the Speaker
of the National Assembly, the Serbian delegation to the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Executive Director of the
Council of the Republic’s Broadcasting Agency, the Deputy Head of
the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), the members of the Republic Electoral
Commission (REC) and the leaders and representatives of the main
parliamentary caucuses. Meetings were also organised with representatives
of the diplomatic corps, of international organisations and missions
and of civil society and the media.
5. During its two-day visit to Serbia, the pre-electoral delegation
found that the preparations for the elections had been smooth, while
noting that these early parliamentary elections, called less than
two years after the previous ones, might have an impact on major
democratisation reforms launched by the authorities. The delegation
welcomed the publication of the first report of the Anti-Corruption
Agency on the financing of the last election campaign, and encouraged
the Agency to continue its work to improve the transparency of parties’
campaign funding and their accountability. The pre-electoral delegation
also called on political parties and entities to refrain from misusing
administrative resources.
6. The ad hoc committee operated in the framework of an International
Election Observation Mission (IEOM) alongside the observation mission
of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation
in Europe (OSCE) and the limited election observation mission (LEOM)
of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the
OSCE (OSCE/ODIHR).
7. The ad hoc committee met in Belgrade from 14 to 17 March 2014.
In particular, it met leaders and representatives of lists of entities
and political parties contesting the election, the head of the OSCE/ODIHR LEOM
and his assistants, a member of the Republic Electoral Commission,
a member of the Anti-Corruption Agency as well as representatives
of civil society and the media. The programme of the ad hoc committee’s meetings
is set out in Appendix 2. The ad hoc committee wishes to thank the
staff of the Council of Europe office in Belgrade, together with
the limited election observation mission (OSCE/ODIHR) for their
co-operation and assistance.
8. On the day of the ballot, the ad hoc committee split into
10 teams which observed the elections in Belgrade and its outskirts,
as well as in the following regions and municipalities: Novi Sad,
Voevodina, Pancevo, Smederevo, Obrenovac, Niš and Vranje. In all,
the members of the ad hoc committee visited more than 121 polling
stations on the day of the ballot.
9. The ad hoc committee concluded that the early parliamentary
elections held in Serbia on 16 March 2014 offered voters a genuine
choice, were conducted on a sound legal basis, and fundamental freedoms
were respected throughout the campaign. Fighting corruption was
one of the main issues of the election campaign and a major concern
for citizens. The media environment was pluralistic, but lacked
journalistic independence and transparency in media ownership. The
statement published after the elections is reproduced in Appendix
3.
2 Legal framework
10. The conduct of the parliamentary elections is primarily
regulated by the Law on the Election of Representatives that has
been amended twice since the elections in 2009 and 2011. The legal
framework for parliamentary elections also includes the Law on Political
Parties, the Law on Financing Political Activities (LFPA) and the
Broadcasting Law, and is supplemented by the regulations, decisions,
and rules of procedure of the REC.
11. In March 2011, the Venice Commission adopted two Opinions
on the Draft Law on “altering and amending the Law on election of
Members of Parliament” of the Republic of Serbia and on the revised
draft law on financing political activities of the Republic of Serbia
(LFPA).
Note A new Law
on Financing Political Activities was adopted on 14 June 2011; it
entered into force on 22 June 2011 and was first tested following the
“all in one” elections of 6 May 2012 (presidential, parliamentary,
local and regional Vojvodina elections).
12. The National Assembly of Serbia is composed of 250 members
elected for four years in a single national constituency. Seats
are allocated proportionally among the lists having gained at least
5% of the votes cast. The 5% rule does not apply to the parties
of the national minorities. The introduction of a quota system in
2011 has improved the access of women to parliament. However, the
leaders of the political parties still have some latitude, admittedly
limited, after the change in the electoral legislation in 2011,
as to their lists of candidates, in so far as elected candidates
can place their mandates at the disposal of their party. Moreover,
a constitutional provision still allows an elected MP to “irrevocably
put his/her mandate at the disposal of the respective political
party”.
Note
13. In the parliamentary elections of 6 May 2012, the results
were as follows: Serbian Progressive Party (Coalition “Serbia on
the move”) – 73 seats; Democratic Party (Coalition “Choice for a
better life”) – 67 seats; Liberal Democrat Party – 19 seats; Party
of the Unified Regions of Serbia – 16 seats; the coalition of Socialist Party
of Serbia, Party of United Pensioners of Serbia and United Serbia
– 44 seats; Democratic Party of Serbia – 21 seats; Hungarian Coalition
of Vojvodina – 5 seats; five seats were obtained by small national
minorities parties’ lists.
14. According to the 2011 census, there are 20 national and linguistic
minorities in Serbia. The self-declaration made during the same
census indicates that Serbs represent 83.3% of the population, the Hungarians
– 3.53%, the Bosnians – 2.33% and the Roma – 2.05%. The Albanian
population boycotted the census. The law on political parties stipulates
that 1 000 members are needed to found a political party representing
a national minority, whereas for an ordinary party there must be
ten times more members.
15. As regards the funding of the election campaign, the Anti-Corruption
Agency has a key role to play in monitoring the implementation of
the 2011 Law on the Financing of Political Activities, as noted
in the Assembly’s election observation report in May 2012 and by
the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO).
Note The Assembly report
on the parliamentary elections of 5 May 2012 underlined that this
new law constitutes a positive step towards creating a completely
modern system of financing for political activities in Serbia, “on
the condition that Serbia’s Anti-Corruption Agency has the requisite
human and financial resources to oversee their financing in a suitable
and transparent fashion”. The Assembly report also recommended that
the law on the financing of political activities be amended “to
embody the obligation for the ACA to publish its reports within
a mandatory deadline after the elections, together with penalties
for infringements of the rules on financing of election campaigns”.
Note
16. The Parliamentary Assembly’s delegation was informed that
the Anti-Corruption Agency had deployed 142 observers in Belgrade
and in other parts of the country to monitor the funding of different
events during the election campaign by the political parties. The
Agency has also the power to monitor cases of possible misuse of
administrative resources. In this regard, the Assembly’s pre-electoral
delegation, last February, called on political parties and entities
to refrain from misusing administrative resources and stated that,
on election day, special attention should be paid to ensuring that
all voting procedures are respected, especially in rural areas.
17. The funding of the election campaign is regulated by the Law
on the Financing of Political Activities. The total amount of private
donations that can be collected from private sources is no longer
connected to public funding; the law instead establishes a cap on
private donations per individual donor/per year. In particular, private
donations are limited to 20 times the average monthly salary (namely
approximately €7 000) for individuals and 200 times the average
monthly salary (namely approximately €70 000) for legal entities. Donations
for election-related activities can be doubled in an election year
(regardless of the number of elections held in a given year). All
donations must be recorded; donations exceeding an average monthly
salary (approximately €350) must be disclosed. The deadline for
reporting campaign finances has been extended to 30 days after the
publication of election results in order to give a better picture
of the total amount of income generated and expenditure disbursed
during campaigns.
Note
18. The Anti-Corruption Agency presented its first Report on Control
of Political Entities related to the financing of the election campaign
to the public in 2012 and a report on the oversight of Financing
of Political Entities in December 2013. During the May 2012 campaign,
only a third of the registered political entities and parties submitted
a report, as required by the law, on the election campaign expenditures.
Note
19. As regards the announcing of the results: Article 85 of the
law requires the REC to publish the results of the elections. However,
Article 85 does not require the REC to publish a table showing the
results broken down for each polling station. A table of results
showing the breakdown for each polling station would enable the parties
to ensure that the results are correctly entered from the polling
station results protocol.
20. The election legislation does not regulate the status on international
and domestic observers. The REC may accredit observers in its instructions,
although these instructions are adopted for each election separately and
do not provide lasting legal grounds for observation.
3 Electoral administration,
registration of the voters lists and candidates
21. The elections were administrated by a two-tier system,
comprising the REC and polling boards. In its extended composition,
the REC comprises 75 members, including deputies of members and
a representative of each entity submitting a list of registered
candidates. The permanent members of the REC are appointed by the
National Assembly for a renewable term of four years. For the early
parliamentary elections of 16 March, 8 387 polling stations were
open in Serbia. In addition, 35 polling stations were open in 20
countries abroad.
22. On 1 March, the REC published the voters lists. For the 16
March elections, the total number of electors on the voters lists
was 6 765 998. In the parliamentary elections of 2012 the voters
lists contained 6 770 013 electors. The number of voters per polling
station should be no less than 100 and no more than 2 500. 7 169 voters
were registered to vote abroad. A total of 6 801 161 ballot papers
were printed, including a reserve of 0.5% over the number of registered
voters. Ballot papers were printed in both Latin and Cyrillic scripts
for the polling stations in areas with a significant presence of
linguistic minorities.
23. Each proposed candidate list should be supported by the signatures
of at least 10 000 voters, with each voter able to support only
one list. The national minorities’ parties need 3 000 signatures
to be registered. The verification of each signature is subject
to a fee of around €0.43, putting the total cost of verification
of 10 000 signatures at around € 4 300. According to some interlocutors,
this amount seems excessive and, in general terms, the procedure
seems too bureaucratic.
24. On 5 March, the REC published
19 electoral lists of entities and parties with the names of 3 020 candidates
as admitted to parliamentary elections: 7 coalitions, 8 political
parties and 4 groups of citizens. The registration of lists of candidates
was inclusive and respected the political pluralism.
25. For the 2012 elections, the authorities in Belgrade and Pristina
reached an agreement on voting by the citizens of Serbia resident
in Kosovo.*
Note A team of
the Parliamentary Assembly ad hoc committee made the journey to
Raska and ascertained that the electoral process had taken place
in calm conditions.
26. As regards the early parliamentary elections on 16 March 2014,
the Parliamentary Assembly delegation was informed that a similar
agreement had been reached between Belgrade and Pristina with the
support of the European Union on holding the early parliamentary
elections in Kosovo as well. The delegation welcomed the agreement,
which allows citizens of Serbia resident in Kosovo to vote. The
elections were organised with the assistance of the OSCE, as was
the case in 2012, primarily due to security reasons, but also in
order to facilitate the holding of the elections regarding technical
issues. Ninety polling stations were opened in 17 municipalities
on voting day.
4 Election campaign
and media environment
27. On 29 January 2014, the President of Serbia, Tomislav
Nikolić, signed the decree to dissolve the National Assembly and
hold early parliamentary elections on 16 March. The election campaign
started on 29 January.
28. The early parliamentary elections on 16 March were the tenth
since the introduction of the multiparty system in Serbia in 1990.
Seven of the ten parliamentary elections were early elections. The
Parliamentary Assembly has observed all parliamentary and presidential
elections in Serbia since 2000.
29. After the dissolution of the National Assembly, political
life was dominated by parties’ negotiations concerning pre-election
coalitions. The Republic Electoral Commission set the deadline of
midnight on 28 February for the presentation of electoral lists.
30. According to the Government of Serbia, the early parliamentary
elections were necessary in order to provide wide support for reforms
and the modernisation of society. The Serbian Progressive Party
(SNS), until now in governmental coalition with Prime Minister Dačić’s
Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), has sought to capitalise on its
support after starting European Union membership talks on 21 January
and in that manner to consolidate its majority in the parliament.
The normalisation of relations with Kosovo is a key European Union condition
for further accession steps. According to recent opinion polls,
51% of Serbs support membership of the European Union, compared
to 22% against.
31. The main issues of the election campaign, inter alia, seemed to be the rise
in unemployment, its rate having reached 20.1% in a country with
a population of 7.1 million and where the average monthly salary
is estimated at around €350; the fight against corruption and organised
crime and the European Union accession negotiations.
32. On 4 February, the ruling SNS party was the first to submit
its list entitled “Aleksandar Vučić – Future we believe in” to the
REC, it included 250 candidates, mainly from the SNS, plus candidates
from allied parties: the New Serbia, the Social Democratic Party
of Serbia, the Serbian Renewal Movement, the Movement Force of Serbia
and the Movement of Socialists, and also a few independent candidates.
The electoral platform of the coalition was based on the questions
of economic development, social justice, the fight against corruption, European
integration and the diplomatic solution of the Kosovo issue.
33. On 5 February, Prime Minister Dačić’s Socialist Party of Serbia
(SPS) presented its own list including United Serbia (JS) and the
Party of United Pensioners of Serbia (PUPS). The electoral platform
of the SPS was similar to those of the SNS.
34. The main opposition parties formed the following electoral
blocs:
- The bloc led by Dragan
Đilas, leader of the Democratic Party (DS), composed of the DS joined
by the New Party, led by former DS member, deputy of the parliament
Zoran Živković, the Alliance of Croats in Voivodina and others.
This bloc conducted its campaign on the issues of social justice,
humanism and equality and European integration;
- The bloc led by Boris Tadić, former DS leader, composed
of his New Democratic Party (in the process of being set up), the
League of Vojvodina Social-Democrats (LSV), Together for Serbia
(ZZS), and also the Democratic Union of Vojvodina Hungarians, the
Bosnian bloc and the Greens of Serbia;
- The bloc led by Čedomir Jovanović, leader of the Liberal
Democratic Party (LDP), composed by the LDP, together with the Social
Democratic Union and the Bosnian Democratic Alliance of Sandzak.
The bloc conducted its campaign on the issues of Euro-Atlantic integration,
the acceptance of the new realities in Kosovo and the modernisation
of the State and society;
- The Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) of the former President
of Serbia, Vojislav Koštunica, was against integration with the
European Union and NATO, in favour of military and political neutrality
and for relaunching economic and political relations with Russia.
35. For the parliamentary elections on 16 March 2014, five party
lists and two coalitions of national minorities were registered.
Representatives of various minorities were also recorded on the
lists of other political parties and coalitions. The majority of
the Albanian parties decided to boycott the elections. In this regard,
the Parliamentary Assembly’s pre-electoral delegation, during its
visit to Belgrade last February, regretted that most of the Albanian
parties had decided to boycott these elections.
36. The majority of interlocutors noted that the election campaign
had been calm and peaceful, but that isolated cases of election-related
violence had been reported. Some concerns were raised that several
parties in power misused state resources at local level, and there
were reports of intimidation of voters, especially public sector
employees.
37. In this regard, on 28 February, the Ombudsperson of Serbia,
the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal
data Protection, and the Anti-Corruption Agency issued a joint statement
asking the contestants to respect the legislation, to refrain from
misusing public resources and not to conduct aggressive campaigns.
38. The legal framework for the media coverage of the campaign
is established by the law on the election of representatives and
the law on broadcasting. The latter instituted a regulatory authority,
the Republic Broadcasting Agency, vested with wide ranging powers
in various media-related fields. During the pre-electoral visit
to Belgrade last February, the Parliamentary Assembly’s delegation
was informed that, according to official statistics, the political
parties did not all receive equal airtime at the beginning of the
election campaign. In this regard, the Republic’s Broadcasting Agency
assured the delegation that equal free airtime would be allocated to
the political parties, and that the rules on commercial advertising
would be respected. The delegation called on all political parties
to refrain from influencing the editorial line of the media.
39. According to media monitoring report of the OSCE/ODIHR limited
election observation mission, the election campaign media coverage
was diverse and reflected all the trends of public opinion. One
of the major problems in the media field is the lack of transparency
regarding ownership of media. In their press release issued after
the 16 March elections, the Parliamentary Assembly’s delegation
pointed out that “the media environment was pluralistic, but lacked
journalistic independence and transparency in media ownership.”
5 Election day
40. Election day was calm and peaceful. The members of
the ad hoc committee visited 121 polling stations and were able
to note that the ballot proceeded in an orderly manner. The voting
and counting operations were conducted, on the whole, with professionalism
and in a calm atmosphere. It was noted that the co-operation between
the persons making up the teams of polling station staff was flawless
and that their knowledge of voting procedures was satisfactory.
41. The members of the ad hoc committee drew attention to a number
of technical problems in the polling stations visited:
- a number of polling stations
were late in opening;
- isolated cases of family voting;
- the presence of a considerable number of people in the
polling stations, which were often small. The very open composition
of the polling boards heightened the transparency and reliability
of the electoral process, but resulted in congestion of the premises,
especially during the opening of the ballot boxes and the counting;
- the design of the polling booths – particularly the flimsiness
of the partitions – was not conducive to ensuring the secrecy of
the ballot. Nevertheless, no attempt to take advantage of this deficiency
was mentioned. The same problem was already reported during the
monitoring of the elections in 2008 and 2012;
- in general, the polling stations were not accessible to
persons with disabilities. However, they could vote from home (mobile
polling stations);
- ballot boxes were not properly sealed in some polling
stations visited;
- isolated cases of non-compliance with the counting procedures
in certain polling stations were observed, mainly in rural localities.
42. On 24 March 2014, the Republic Electoral Commission announced
the official results of the early parliamentary elections. The parties
and coalitions gained the following results: Coalition of the Serbian Progressive
Party (“Aleksandar Vučić – Future we believe in”) – 158 seats; Coalition
of Socialist Party of Serbia – 44 seats; Democratic Party – 19 seats;
Coalition of New Democratic Party – 18 seats; Hungarian Coalition of
Vojvodina – 6 seats; Party of democratic action of Sandzak – 3 seats;
Party of democratic action of Riza Halimi – 2 seats. The turnout
at the elections was 53%, in Kosovo the turnout was 33.17%.
6 Conclusions and
recommendations
43. The ad hoc committee concluded that the early parliamentary
elections held in Serbia on 16 March 2014 offered voters a genuine
choice, were conducted on a sound legal basis, and fundamental freedoms
were respected throughout the campaign. Election day was calm and
peaceful and that the ballot proceeded in an orderly manner.
44. The ad hoc committee noted that the election campaign was
calm and peaceful. However, it regrets that there are a few recurrent
problems from one election to another: isolated cases of violence,
misuse of administrative resources at local level, cases of intimidation
of voters, particularly public sector employees.
45. The modified legal framework constitutes a sound legal basis
for conducting democratic elections. Nevertheless, the ad hoc committee
invites the Serbian authorities to improve the election legislation
and its full application according to the Parliamentary Assembly
resolutions and in close co-operation with the Venice Commission
in the following fields:
- to
reinforce the transparency concerning media ownership and the legal
mechanisms of protection of journalistic independence;
- to improve the Law on the Financing of Political Activities
to make more efficient the follow-up of the reports on election
campaign expenditures and to reinforce the transparency of funding
of political parties taking into consideration the experience of
early parliamentary elections of 16 March 2014;
- to amend the Law on the Election of Representatives in
order to introduce provisions on the status of international and
domestic observers.
46. To further improve some technical aspects of the electoral
processes, the ad hoc committee invites the Serbian authorities
to:
- improve the general fitting-out
of polling station premises, including the technical equipment,
in order to make them better suited to the conduct of the ballot;
- improve polling booth design to enhance the secrecy of
the ballot;
- make polling stations accessible for persons with disabilities;
- arrange training for polling board members, particularly
in rural localities, to improve their command of the voting procedures.
Appendix 1 – Composition
of the ad hoc committee
Based on proposals by the political groups
of the Assembly, the ad hoc committee was composed as follows:
Pedro AGRAMUNT,* (Spain, EPP/CD), Head of the Delegation
- Group
of the European People’s Party (EPP/CD)
- Pedro AGRAMUNT,* Spain
- Viorel BADEA, Romania
- Giuseppe GALATI, Italy
- Foteini PIPILI, Greece
- Kimmo SASI, Finland
- Socialist Group (SOC)
- Ferdinando AIELLO, Italy
- Igor IVANOVSKI,* “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”
- Luc RECORDON, Switzerland
- Kostas TRIANTAFYLLOS, Greece
- European Democrat Group (EDG)
- Reha DENEMEÇ, Turkey
- Ingebjørg GODSKESEN,* Norway
- Alliance of Liberals and Democrats
for Europe (ALDE)
- Andrea
RIGONI, Italy
- Hirakli CHIKOVANI, Georgia
- Ionuţ-Marian STROE, Romania
- Group of the United European
Left (UEL)
- Grigore
PETRENCO,* Republic of Moldova
- Venice Commission
- Secretariat
- Chemavon CHAHBAZIAN, Deputy
Head of Secretariat, Interparliamentary Co-operation and Election
Observation Division, Secretariat of the Parliamentary Assembly
- Franck DAESCHLER, Principal Administrative Assistant,
Interparliamentary Co-operation and Election Observation Division
- Danièle GASTL, Assistant, Interparliamentary Co-operation
and Election Observation Division
*
Pre-electoral mission (19-20 February 2014)
Appendix 2 – Programme of
the election observation mission (14-17 March 2014)
Friday
14 March 2014
09:30-10:30 Meeting of the PACE ad hoc committee:
- Briefing on the pre-electoral
mission, by Mr Pedro Agramunt, Head of the Delegation
- Briefing by members
of the pre-electoral mission
- Briefing by Ms Antje Rothemund, Head of the Council of
Europe Office in Belgrade
- Briefing on election legislation, by Mr Owen Masters,
expert from the Venice Commission
- Practical and logistical arrangements, Secretariat
Joint parliamentary briefing: PACE–OSCE-PA
11:00-11:15 Opening of briefing programme by heads of parliamentary
delegations
11:15-11:30 Interventions by heads of international offices
in Serbia
- Acting Head of OSCE
Mission to Serbia, Ms Paula Thiede
- Head of the Council of Europe Office in Belgrade, Ms Antje
Rothemund
11:30-12:45 Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR limited election observation
mission
- Ambassador Boris Frlec
- Core team analysts
14:30-15:00 Democratic Party (DS), Ms Darija Šajin and Mr
Vladimir Todorić
15:00-15:30 Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), Ms Dijana Vukomanović
15:30-16:00 Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), Mr Marko Đurić
16:30-17:00 Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS), Mr Slobodan
Samardžić
17:00-17:30 New Democratic Party (NDS), Mr Nenad Konstantinović
17:30-18:00 Minority issues round table:
- Mr Nenad Čelarevic, National
Programme Officer, Democratization Department, OSCE Mission to Serbia
- Ms Srđan Šajn, MP, Chairperson of the Roma Party
- Mr Riza Halimi, Chairperson of the Party of Democratic
Action (Albanian)
18:00-18:30 Mr Nemanja Cocic,
Anti-Corruption Agency
Saturday 15 March 2014
10:15-11:00 Ms Tamara Stojčević, Republic Electoral Commission
11:00-12:00 Round table with civil society representatives:
- Ms Sonja Licht, Belgrade Fund
for Political Excellence (BFFE)
- Ms Sonja Biserko, Helsinki Committee for Human Rights
- Mr Paul Prososki, International Republican Institute
- Mr Milan Antonijević, Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights
(YUCOM/BKVF)
12:00-13:00 Round table with media representatives :
- Mr Miloš Rajković and Ms Jelena
Kolo, Republic Broadcasting Agency
- Ms Vesna Dobrosavljević, TV B92
- Mr Zoran Stanojević, Radio Television of Serbia
- Mr Dragan Janjić, NUNS (Independent Journalist Association
of Serbia)
13:00-13:15 Meeting with drivers and interpreters
Afternoon Deployment of teams for the regions
Sunday 16 March 2014
Observation of the elections (07:00-20:00)
Monday 17 March 2014
08:30-9:30 Debriefing meeting of the PACE ad hoc committee
09:30-10:30 Meeting of the Heads of the IEOM delegations
13:30 Press conference
Appendix 3 – Statement by
the International Election Observation Mission (IEOM)
Serbia elections:
a genuine choice and fundamental freedoms respected
The 16 March 2014 early parliamentary elections offered voters
a genuine choice, were conducted on a sound legal basis, and fundamental
freedoms were respected throughout the campaign, international election observers
said in a statement issued today. The observers also highlighted
the need for some further legal reform and increased media pluralism.
“Serbia conducted truly democratic elections, with a wide
range of options for voters and effective procedures. The inclusive
and transparent manner in which this vote was conducted is praiseworthy,”
said Roberto Battelli, the Special Co-ordinator who led the short-term
OSCE observer mission. “Voters and representatives of political
parties, alike, expressed a high degree of trust in the electoral
process – something all citizens can be proud of.”
Election commissions at all levels performed their duties
efficiently and professionally and met legal deadlines, and the
Republic Election Commission (REC) adopted its decisions in sessions
that were open to the media and accredited observers.
“We were particularly impressed that the high standard of
Election Day procedures was in evidence not only in Belgrade and
other large cities, but also in villages and rural areas,” said
Luigi Compagna, the head of the OSCE PA delegation. “This uniformity
is crucial for democratically administered elections and for the enfranchisement
of all voters.”
The media landscape is diverse, with a large number of public
and private outlets, but the range of opinions offered was limited
by the influence exerted on media by political parties in power,
including through public funding. The lack of transparency in media
ownership remains a concern.
Both public and private television stations offered extensive
coverage of the elections in a variety of formats, mostly in a neutral
tone, but critical analytical reporting and voter education content
were lacking.
“Fighting corruption was one of the main issues of the election
campaign and a major concern for citizens. The newly-elected parliament
should take tangible measures to address this problem,” said Pedro
Agramunt, the Head of the PACE delegation. “The media environment
was pluralistic, but lacked journalistic independence and transparency
in media ownership.”
The legal framework is in line with OSCE and Council of Europe
commitments, and other international standards, although certain
recommendations from previous elections remained unaddressed. Some
aspects were improved through by-laws issued by the REC, the statement
said.
“I hope this election allows the Serbian authorities to develop
the political will needed to proceed with reforms necessary to bring
legislation further in line with OSCE commitments and recommendations,”
said Ambassador Boris Frlec, the Head of the OSCE/ODIHR Limited
Election Observation Mission. “The next four years should give the
authorities ample opportunity to move forward.”
In general, the campaign was low-key and peaceful, although
isolated incidents of election-related violence were reported. Some
concerns were raised that different parties in power misused state
resources at the local level, and there were credible reports of
cases of intimidation of voters, especially public sector employees.
While the political finance law provides an adequate framework
for party activities, the lack of transparency of sources remains
a concern. The legal framework establishes limits on annual private
contributions for the campaign, but not for campaign expenditures.
A number of national minority parties registered their electoral
lists either in coalitions with other minority parties or jointly
with national parties and coalitions. Some safeguards were introduced
to prevent the abuse of affirmative measures by political entities
that do not represent national minorities, in line with previous recommendations.
