Political parties are the most important means of political participation in Serbia. They play a central role in all political processes and limit the growing influence of new actors – social movements and civil society organizations. Despite such a dominant position, the party system itself is not particularly stable, nor do the parties enjoy a high level of trust among the citizens of Serbia.

The direct consequence of such a situation is the exceptional volatility and variability of the party scene. On the other hand, the leaders and people in the management of the parties show unusual stability. The politicians that were there at the very beginning of party pluralism are still very much part of the political scene. This superiority of leaders is reflected in intra-party relations and promotes party discipline as one of the most noticeable characteristics. Probably the strongest proof of the lack of intra-party competition is the inviolability of party leaders and the fact that the removal of the leader, and most often the founder of the party, is the exception, not the rule. This data becomes even more intriguing when we keep in mind that many parties have not changed their leaders since their establishment (some even for 30 years), regardless of the decline in popularity.

The most important characteristic of the party system in Serbia is how narrow the ideological space is. Both the vertical – value – dimension, and the relatively narrow field of the center in relation to economic issues. In other words, after the dilemma of “Kosovo or the European Union” was (temporarily) removed from the top of the agenda, the parties in Serbia did not find new fundamental dividing lines. One of the reasons why new topics do not appear is the populist wave that swept the political scene of Serbia and which put a whole range of populist topics on the agenda. This also led to the opening of old issues in a, yet again, populist way, i.e. through a premise that society is divided into hardworking people and the corrupt elite. Under the influence of populism, a cleavage arose between the old and new parties, that is, between the populist and other parties.

However, the tone for the whole system is set by the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS). From the position of the dominant party, it successfully maintains its centrist and catch-all position, expanding its ideological scope more and more. The shift of the electorate from the anti-European position of the former SRS to the moderately pro-European SNS has led to a narrowing of the ideological space and a timid pro-European consensus.

OnlineCasino 24 PL — Graph 1: Narrowing of ideological space, and the emergence of new political parties 2008-2018.

There is less and less political space for new parties, for similar reasons for which the space is narrowed for both the opposition and civil society. Therefore, the prerequisite for a new party is a kind of an initial political capital – leaders who are somewhat known to the public or reliance on an ideologically close civil society. The media space is equally small for all opposition parties, with the partial exception during the election campaign. The issue of available resources is therefore of great importance for both new and old parties.

Table 1. Total party revenues 2016-2019 (in million EUR)

When it comes to financing, regardless of several possible sources, political parties in Serbia are, as a rule, focused on the state budget and are dependent on it for financing. Regular annual reports that parties submit to the Anti-Corruption Agency show that by far the largest share of revenue comes from the state – between 85% and 100% for opposition parties, and about 65% of revenue for the Progressives and 40% for the Socialists; this practice is present in regular financing, but also in the financing of election campaigns. This results in two phenomena – (1) the parties are too state-oriented, which further diminishes the importance of membership and those who support the parties, and (2) the gap between budget-funded and non-budget-funded parties increases (this becomes especially evident when a parliamentary party loses budget finances because it has not passed the census and no alternative funding model has been developed).

The second most important source of funding are individual donations. However, regardless of the sources of financing and the degree of (non)control that the state implements, the last period is also characterized by a significant disproportion of available finances. This disproportion is the result of unequal representation in the parliament, and is further strengthened by existing legal solutions.

The parties’ ties with the citizens are scarce, which is proven by the significant distrust in political institutions. Parties are not the only “culprits” here – civil society does not provide enough incentives nor does it articulate interests well enough to put pressure on the parties. The links between citizens, civil society organizations and parties are rather weak and based on one-way top-down communication. It is especially worrying that these trends have not changed since the very beginning of the multi-party system.

Trends

View all

POLITICAL PARTIES IN SERBIA

Creating a party system with a predominant party

Grade

Negative

Since the 2014 elections, the coalition centered around the SNS has won about 50% of the vote. This party is in power at all levels, with the exception of a few smaller municipalities in Serbia. This concentration of power adversely affects democracy because there are no effective control and monitoring mechanisms. These mechanisms would allow the ruling party to remain within the legal framework, but also to be accountable to its voters. The dominance of the SNS is reflected not only in the favor of the voters, but also in the resources and finances that are available to them. This is a direct consequence of the amendments to the law on the financing of political parties, which further strengthens the unequal position of the parties, and makes their election struggle less equal.

POLITICAL PARTIES IN SERBIA

Atomization of the opposition and the party system

Grade

Negative

The atomization and fragmentation of opposition parties has been going on since the 2012 elections. The fragmentation of opposition parties and division along different lines (ideological and tactical), but also the personal intolerance of leaders makes it impossible for the opposition to perform its functions of control and supervision of the government. There are no alternative policies proposed either, and that would at least formally create an alternative to the current government. Without these functions performed by the opposition, there is no democratic society, especially when it becomes a long-term feature of the party system. Atomization can also be seen in numerous small parties that gather around the SNS. Another example is the constant decrease in support for the SPS coalition, which brings it closer to other opposition parties in terms of strength.

POLITICAL PARTIES IN SERBIA

Blurring the ideological positions of the parties

Grade

Negative

Political parties in Serbia have never been fully ideologically profiled; however, during the first and second decades of party pluralism, the lines of political division, as well as the most important topics, were more noticeable. With the rise of the SNS and their taking the position of an all-encompassing party, the ideological differentiation of the parties has significantly decreased. Almost all parties have a reduced clarity of views on specific issues. Moreover, it is common for the members of the SNS party to hold completely contradictory views, especially when comparing their messages for the domestic and international public. At the same time, opposition parties’ main agenda is simply challenging the regime. They do not pay attention to ideological consistency of their views. This situation makes it difficult for voters to comprehend the political field and make politicians accountable for their promises.

POLITICAL PARTIES IN SERBIA

Presidentialization and personalization of politics

Grade

Negative

An additional consequence of ideological inconsistency is the increasing importance of party presidents for the functioning of said parties. This is most apparent in the case of SNS. The president of this party is also the President of the state. This is not the only example of presidentialization of the party, but after the SPS under Milosevic, the SNS is the only party that depends to that extent on the popularity of the president. Presidentialization is not limited to the relationship with voters (although such would have a significant negative impact on political representation), but also on the dynamics of the government and parliament - it is obvious that all important decisions are made by President Vučić, and that ministers and MPs consult and rely on the President.

Recommendations

View all

POLITICAL PARTIES IN SERBIA

Provide equal conditions for election competition

The position of the opposition is a weak point of almost every system; however, in Serbia, opposition parties are systemically weakened, both at the level of authoritarian practices and due to a number of institutional mechanisms introduced to strengthen the dominance of the ruling party.

Creating more equal working conditions (through changes to the rules of procedure of the Assembly, funding mechanisms and media conditions) and political competition (not to be understood solely in the context of the election campaign) is a precondition for establishing a more stable democratic order.

POLITICAL PARTIES IN SERBIA

Encourage the enlargement of the party / party system

Electoral rules should encourage the enlargement of the party scene; returning the electoral threshold to 5%, introducing a moderate tiered threshold for coalitions, and preventing “fake” minority parties from using loopholes in the law would trigger aggregation trends.

This trend could be reinforced by other incentives such as party financing mechanisms or the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly.

POLITICAL PARTIES IN SERBIA

Encourage ideological profiling of parties

The ideological positions of the parties are of great importance for the voters, their monitoring of politics and determining political responsibility.

That is why it is important that the political positions of the parties are articulated more clearly, which of course is neither a short-term nor a simple process. It can be encouraged by a larger space for representatives of the public and civil society, more transparent work of the National Assembly (public debates and public hearings), but also by a different attitude of the media towards politicians.

POLITICAL PARTIES IN SERBIA

Incentives for intra-party competition

Encouraging intra-party competition would lead to more stable and transparent parties in the long run, as well as reducing the effects of presidentialization.

This can be achieved through institutional mechanisms (separation of elections at different levels or the introduction of preferential voting), but also through incentives coming from the media or civil society.

Political parties in Serbia

Dušan Spasojević

Trends

Creating a party system with a predominant party

Atomization of the opposition and the party system

Blurring the ideological positions of the parties

Presidentialization and personalization of politics

Recommendations

Provide equal conditions for election competition

Encourage the enlargement of the party / party system

Encourage ideological profiling of parties

Incentives for intra-party competition

Parliament of Serbia

Human Rights and Democracy