See related documentsElection observation report
| Doc. 12938
| 24 May 2012
Observation of the parliamentary elections and the early presidential election in Serbia (6 May 2012)
1. Introduction
1. At its meeting on 23 January 2012, the Bureau of
the Parliamentary Assembly decided, in principle and subject to
receipt of an invitation from the competent national authorities
and confirmation of the date, to observe the elections in Serbia
and form an ad hoc committee for the purpose, consisting of 30 members,
and authorised a pre-election mission that would take place about
a month prior to the elections. The Bureau, at its meeting on 8
March 2012, took note of the declarations that the candidates for
the observation mission had no conflicts of interest, approved the
membership of the ad hoc committee, and appointed Mr Jean-Charles Gardetto
Chairperson. On 23 April 2012, the Bureau approved the final composition
of the ad hoc committee (see Appendix 1).
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,
“When 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. A pre-election delegation went to Belgrade on 17 and 18 April
2012 in the context of a pre-election mission to assess the preparation
of the elections and the election campaign, ahead of the parliamentary elections
and the early presidential election on 6 May 2012. The delegation
met Ms Slavica Ðukic Dejanovic, Speaker of the Parliament, Mr Ivica
Dacic, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior, Mr Duško Radakovic,
Secretary of State, Ministry for Human Rights and Minorities, State
Administration and Local Self-Government, the Chairperson of the
Republic Election Commission (REC), the President of the Republic Broadcasting
Agency and representatives of the main parliamentary groups. However,
the representatives of the chief opposition parliamentary group
“For Serbia” were not available to meet the members of the delegation.
Meetings were also organised with representatives of the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the limited mission
of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the
OSCE (OSCE/ODIHR), as well as with representatives of civil society
and the media.
4. On the whole, during the pre-election mission the delegation
noted with satisfaction that all the political players stated that
they had confidence in the electoral process, including the election
campaign which, for most political parties, focused essentially
on the issues of unemployment, socio-economic development, European
integration and, to a far lesser extent, on Kosovo.
5. The delegation stressed that a number of provisions introduced
into the electoral legislation, amended in 2011, would improve the
effective choice of the citizens: the introduction of closed lists
and the end of “party-controlled mandates”, the abolition of “blank
letters of resignation” and better access of women to Parliament by
means of a gender quota. While observing that this framework provided
the conditions for genuinely competitive elections, it urged all
political parties to implement these changes in good faith and in
the spirit of the law. The introduction of a single list of voters
at the national level is also a positive measure. The delegation also
took note of the complaints lodged by the small political parties
concerning fair access to financing and to the media.
6. The ad hoc committee operated in the framework of an International
Election Observation Mission (IEOM) alongside the limited observation
mission of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and the limited election observation
mission (LEOM) of the OSCE/ODIHR. A delegation of the Congress of
Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe moreover
observed the local and provincial elections held the same day.
7. The ad hoc committee met in Belgrade on 4 and 5 May 2012.
In particular, it met Ms Slavica Ðukic Dejanovic, Speaker of the
Parliament, representatives of the political parties contesting
the election, and presidential election candidates, a member of
the Republic Election Commission, the head of the OSCE/ODIHR LEOM
and his assistants, and 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
11 teams which observed the elections in Belgrade and its outskirts,
as well as in the following regions and municipalities: Novi Sad,
Bačka Palanka, Vrbas, Sombor, Zemun, Pancevo, Smederevo, Mladenovac,
Obrenovac, Smederevo Palanka, Kragujevac, Kraljevo, Kruševac Čačak,
Niš, Paracin, Aleksinac, Prokuplje, Leskovac, Pirot, Vranje, Bujanovac,
Preševo, Novi Pazar, Tutin and Raška. In all, the members of the
ad hoc committee visited more than 182 polling stations on the day
of the ballot.
9. The ad hoc committee concluded that the parliamentary elections
and the early presidential election held in Serbia on 6 May 2012
“addressed most of the Council of Europe standards for democratic
elections. The citizens made their choice freely among a large number
of parties and presidential candidates. Nevertheless, the media
coverage could have been more balanced. Regarding the transparency
of campaign financing, the PACE delegation looks forward to the
report of the Anti-Corruption Agency on this issue”. The ad hoc committee
also commended the efforts made by the international community and
by Belgrade and Pristina, which enabled the Serbian citizens of
Kosovo to exercise their right to vote. The press release published
after the elections is reproduced in Appendix 3.
2. Political
and legal framework
10. On 13 March 2012, the President of the Republic of
Serbia, Mr Boris Tadić, decided to hold the parliamentary elections
on 6 May 2012. The local and provincial elections were set for the
same date. On 5 April 2012, more than 10 months before the end of
his term, the President of Serbia resigned and the President of
the Parliament of Serbia decided to hold the early presidential
election also on 6 May. Since the organisation of multi-party elections
began in Serbia in 1990, it was the first time that different elections
had taken place on the same date.
11. Parliamentary and presidential elections in Serbia are governed
by the Constitution of 2006. In 2003, the Parliamentary Assembly
adopted Resolution 1320 (2003) on a Code of Good Practice in Electoral
Matters inviting the Venice Commission, in co-operation with the
OSCE/ODIHR, to prepare opinions on possible improvements to legislation
and electoral practice in the Republic of Serbia. Since that date,
the Venice Commission has adopted joint opinions with the OSCE/ODIHR
concerning the law on parliamentary, presidential and local elections
(2006), the draft law on parliamentary elections in Serbia (2009),
the draft law “altering and amending the law on election of members
of Parliament” (2001) and the draft law on financing political activities
in the Republic of Serbia. In January 2012, the REC adopted rules
of procedure for the elections of 6 May 2012.
12. Overall, the altered legal framework constitutes a credible
basis for conducting democratic elections. Nonetheless, certain
aspects of the electoral process require improvement. In particular,
the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR had recommended that the
law should be amended to compel the political parties and coalitions
to define and announce the order of the candidatures on their lists
before the ballot, rather than let them choose, after the elections,
the candidates who would hold a seat.
13. On that score, in accordance with a 2011 decision of the Constitutional
Court of Serbia and having regard to the aforementioned recommendations
of the Venice Commission, the electoral law was amended in 2011
by clarifying the order of candidatures on the party lists before
the poll. However, the Constitution still allows for elected members
to place their mandate at the disposal of their own party. The Parliamentary Assembly’s
pre-election mission was informed that the Serbian Radical Party
had announced its intention to have its candidates sign a memorandum
with the undertaking to pay back to the party the equivalent of
€30 000 if the elected candidate appearing on its list should leave
the party.
14. In 2011, the parliament enacted the law on financing of political
activities which permits public as well as private financing, thereby
recognising that parties need adequate resources to fulfil their
role. The recently enacted law may constitute a positive step towards
creating a complete modern system of financing for political activities
in Serbia on condition that the Anti-Corruption Agency of Serbia
(ACA) has the requisite human and financial resources to ensure
suitable and transparent supervision.
15. Public financing represents approximately 8 million euros
for the organisation of each national election. For the parliamentary
elections of 6 May 2012, 20% of that amount was apparently shared
out among all participants in the elections, with the remaining
80% to be distributed after the elections among the political parties
having passed the 5% threshold and in proportion to the number of
seats won. For the presidential election, 50% of the sum will be
distributed among all the candidates participating in the first
round and the remaining 50% between the two candidates who contested
the second round.
16. The ACA is instructed for the first time to oversee the expenditure
of the election contenders. At the time of the election campaign,
the ACA did not find any infringements of the law but requested
information on the expenditure of two political parties. The law
on political activities does not require the ACA to publish its
findings and does not set deadlines for the publication of its reports
after the elections. However, many informants conveyed their suspicions,
fearing that corruption nevertheless continued. On that subject,
the latest GRECO report on Serbia, published in 2010, raised issues
concerning the application of the rules for financing election campaigns,
the lack of transparency in that regard and the effectiveness of
penalties for infringements of the legislation. The Assembly's ad
hoc committee, in its statement after the elections of 6 May, emphasised: “Regarding
the transparency of campaign financing, the PACE delegation looks
forward to the report of the Anti-Corruption Agency on this issue”.
3. Electoral administration
and registration of the lists and of presidential candidates
17. Serbia has a multi-tiered electoral administration:
the Republic Election Commission (REC), a provincial electoral commission
in Vojvodina, two electoral commissions for the conurbations of
Belgrade and Niš, 160 municipal electoral commissions and 8 588 polling
stations. In addition, 38 polling stations have been opened in 22
foreign countries.
18. On 30 April 2012, the authorities in Belgrade and Pristina
reached an agreement on voting by the citizens of Serbia resident
in Kosovo. Under the agreement, welcomed extensively by the international
community, the entire electoral process in the territory of Kosovo
was organised by the OSCE mission which opened 28 polling stations
in Kosovo on election day, where Serbian citizens were able to take
part in the parliamentary elections and in the presidential election.
Next, the staff of the OSCE mission transferred the ballot papers
to two counting centres located in the towns of Raska and Vranje
– in Serbia. A team of the Assembly ad hoc committee made the journey
to Raska and ascertained that the electoral process had taken place
in calm conditions.
19. The REC consists of a president and 16 members (and their
alternates) appointed by the National Assembly. It also appoints
a non-voting secretary together with a non-voting member who represents
the National Statistical Office. In its extended composition, the
REC also includes a representative of each entity submitting a list
of registered candidates. The great majority of the interlocutors
whom the ad hoc committee met expressed their support for the REC
and their confidence in its operation.
20. In December 2011, the new law on the uniform electoral register
came into force. It prescribes the compilation of a uniform computerised
national electoral roll. For the first time, the elections of 6
May 2012 were held on the basis of this list of voters. The Ministry
of State Administration and Local Self-Government drew up the national
electoral roll on the basis of the computerised municipal electoral
rolls, formerly kept by the municipal authorities and by the Ministry
of the Interior according to different electronic formats. Constituents were
invited to verify the listed data concerning them between 14 March
and 20 April 2012. According to the REC’s data, as at 3 May, 6 770
013 voters were registered on the uniform computerised national
register. The LEOM of the OSCE/ODIHR nevertheless noted a certain
lack of transparency in the process of compiling the electoral register.
21. The National Assembly of Serbia is composed of 250 members
elected for four years in a single national constituency. Seats
are allocated proportionally between the lists having gained at
least 5% of the votes cast. The 5% rule does not apply to the parties
of the minorities. 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 the elected candidates can place their mandates at
the disposal of their parties.
22. At present, in Serbia there are 89 political parties registered
according to the law on political parties enacted in 2009. Some
two million Serbians are members of political parties, a figure
which increased by about 70 000 persons in 2012. In general, the
registration of lists of candidates upheld pluralism as the REC registered
28 lists fielded by 7 coalitions (41 political parties and 2 associations),
9 political parties and 2 groups of citizens.
23. About 17% of Serbia’s population declared that they belonged
to the 20 national minorities at the 2002 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. For the parliamentary
elections of 6 May 2012, four party lists and two coalitions of
national minorities were registered. Representatives of various
national minorities were registered on the lists of other political
parties and other coalitions.
24. As regards the presidential election, 12 candidates were registered
to contest it, including the incumbent President Boris Tadić, of
the Better Life Coalition; Tomislav Nikolić, Chairperson of the
Serbian Progressive Party; Ivica Dačić, Minister of the Interior
representing the Socialist Party of Serbia; Vojislav Koštunica of
the Democratic Party of Serbia; Čedomir Jovanović of the Liberal
Democrat Party. Among the presidential candidates were two women
and a representative of the Hungarian minority and the Mufti of
the Sandžak region.
4. Election campaign
and media environment
25. The campaign opened on 13 March for the parliamentary
elections and on 5 April for the presidential election. During the
campaign, the political climate was generally quiet. The campaign
grew more intense over the last two weeks. The issues that dominated
the campaign were unemployment and socio-economic development, privatisation
and the fight against corruption, European integration and, though
much less so, Kosovo. On the whole, the campaigns for the parliamentary
elections and the presidential election were marked by the confrontation
between the two principal presidential election candidates – Mr
Tadić and Mr Nikolić.
26. The ad hoc committee was informed by certain representatives
of political parties and NGOs of instances of buying votes, particularly
among the Roma population, above all in rural localities, misuse
of administrative resources and isolated cases of intimidation of
electors. In that connection, the ad hoc committee asks the competent
national authorities to do their utmost to shed light on these allegations
in order to determine the responsibilities and to inform public
opinion. The ad hoc committee is convinced that any recurrence of
such practices on future electoral occasions must be averted at
all costs.
27. Two days before the poll, some people of Albanian origin were
arrested in southern Serbia – in the localities of Bujanovac, Veliki
Trnovac and Breznica, one a candidate in the local elections. According
to the Serbian authorities, the arrested persons were implicated
in the war crimes of 2001. The ad hoc committee, without means of
verifying the facts, nevertheless questions the timing of the arrest
of these people, the media coverage of the event and the fact that
the arrest was announced by the Minister of the Interior who was
himself standing for the presidential election.
28. Serbia’s media landscape is highly diversified and reflects
all the trends of public opinion. 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 powers in various media-related fields. The ad hoc committee
noted with satisfaction that the national broadcasting agency ensured
that the political parties benefited from free and equal air time
and that the rules on commercial advertising were respected. However,
political communication on the Internet should comply with the code
of ethics for elections.
29. One of the major problems in the media field is the lack of
transparency regarding owners of media. Various interlocutors emphasised
the phenomenon of close interconnection between politics and financial flows.
The ad hoc committee was informed of cases of economic and political
pressure applied to journalists. According to the report on media
monitoring of the OSCE/ODIHR LEOM, the presidential election candidate Mr
Tadić, benefited more from media coverage before the start of the
official campaign. Some of the people the ad hoc committee spoke
to generally expressed their doubts about the independence and objectiveness
of the media.
5. Election day
30. The day of the ballot was calm. The members of the
ad hoc committee visited 182 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
composure. It was reported 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.
31. The members of the ad hoc committee drew attention to a number
of technical problems in the polling stations visited:
- design of the polling booths
– particularly the flimsiness of the partitions – was not apt to
ensure 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;
- the presence of a considerable number of people in the
polling stations, sometimes over 20 people. In fact the very open
composition of the polling boards heightened the transparency and
reliability of the electoral process. However, it resulted in congestion
of the premises, especially during the opening of the ballot boxes
and the counting;
- 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;
- cases of non-compliance with the counting procedures in
certain polling stations were observed in rural localities especially;
- long queues were observed in some polling stations in
the localities with an Albanian-speaking or mixed population. The
electoral lists were in Cyrillic script so that not all members
of the teams of polling station staff could read the voters’ names,
which delayed the voting process;
- in some polling stations, the electoral lists had not
been compiled in alphabetical order.
32. On 7 May 2012, the REC announced the provisional results of
the parliamentary elections. The parties and coalitions gained the
following results: Serbian Progressive Party (Coalition “Serbia
on the move”) – 24.1%; Democratic Party (Coalition “Choice for a
better life”) – 22.4%; Liberal Democrat Party – 6.33%; Party of
the Unified Regions of Serbia – 5.51%; Socialist Party of Serbia
– 14.4%; Democratic Party of Serbia – 6.9%; Hungarian Coalition
of Vojvodina – 1.9%.
33. At the first round of voting for the presidential election,
the DS candidate, Boris Tadić, and the Serbian Progressive Party
candidate, Tomislav Nikolić, received the highest number of votes:
26.7% for Boris Tadić and 25.5% for Tomislav Nikolić. The other
candidates obtained the following results: Zoran Dragisic (Independent)
– 21.7%; Ivica Dacic (Socialist Party of Serbia) – 15.3%; Vojislav
Kostunic (Democratic Party of Serbia) – 7.7%. As no candidate won
more than 50% of the votes cast, a second round was scheduled for
20 May 2012 between the two candidates totalling the most votes.
The turnout at the elections was about 58%, showing the voters’
interest in the ballot.
34. The ad hoc committee felt that it would not be necessary to
observe the second round of the presidential election given the
fact that the election day did not raise any major problems and
especially since the OSCE/ODIHR limited observation mission would
monitor the voting on the spot. According to the REC preliminary results
announced on 21 May 2012, Tomislav Nikolić won the election with
49.55 % of the votes cast, and Boris Tadić received 47.30% of the
votes cast.
35. The turnout for the second round of the presidential election
on 20 May 2012 was 46.37%.
6. Conclusions
and recommendations
36. The ad hoc committee concluded that the parliamentary
and presidential elections of 6 May 2012 held in Serbia complied
with most of the Council of Europe standards in respect of democratic
elections. The citizens chose freely from a large number of parties
and presidential candidates. Election day was calm. The members
of the ad hoc committee visited 182 polling stations and were able
to note that the poll went ahead in an orderly manner, and that
the voting and counting operations were generally conducted with professionalism
and composure.
37. The ad hoc committee emphasised the significance of the turnout
of Serbian citizens living in Kosovo at the parliamentary and presidential
elections in Serbia and in that regard commended the efforts made
by the international community as well as by Belgrade and Pristina.
38. The ad hoc committee noted with satisfaction that the authorities
of Serbia had followed the recommendations contained in the Assembly's
report on the observation of the 2008 elections The modified legal
framework constitutes a credible basis for conducting democratic
elections. However, the ad hoc committee invites the Serbian authorities
to improve the electoral legislation in line with the joint recommendations
of the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR, and to do so before
the next national elections.
39. The law on financing of political activities passed in 2011
may constitute a positive step towards creating a complete 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 ad hoc committee considers that the law on political
activities should be amended to embody the obligation for the Anti-Corruption
Agency to publish its rapports within a mandatory deadline after the
elections, together with penalties for infringements of the rules
on financing of election campaigns.
40. The ad hoc committee noted that the media coverage of the
election campaign should have been more balanced. It also expressed
its anxiety over the lack of transparency regarding the owners of
media and the close interconnection between politics and financial
flows. The ad hoc committee was informed by various interlocutors
of cases of economic and political pressure applied to journalists.
Not having the means to verify the facts, the ad hoc committee asks
the competent national authorities to do their utmost to shed light
on these allegations in order to determine the responsibilities,
apply suitable penalties and inform national public opinion. The
ad hoc committee is convinced that any recurrence of such practices
on future electoral occasions must be averted at all costs.
41. To improve the electoral processes in Serbia further, the
ad hoc committee invites the Serbian authorities to:
- generally improve the fitting-out
of the 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 confidentiality
of the ballot;
- make polling stations accessible for persons with disabilities;
- look into the possibility of drawing up a single electoral
list in Cyrillic and Latin lettering in the localities with a mixed
population to speed up the search for voters’ names and thus avert
congestion in the polling stations;
- draw up the electoral lists in alphabetical order in all
polling stations;
- improve the quality of the seals on ballot boxes;
- 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
(open)
Based on proposals by the political groups
in the Assembly, the ad hoc committee was composed as follows:
- Jean-Charles GARDETTO, Head
of the Delegation
- Group of the European People’s
Party (EPP/CD)
- Jean-Charles
GARDETTO, Monaco
- Marietta de POURBAIX-LUNDIN, Sweden
- Kimmo SASI, Finland
- Stefaan VERCAMER, Belgium
- Luca VOLONTÈ, Italy
- Socialist Group (SOC)
- Josette DURRIEU, France
- Jonas GUNNARSSON, Sweden
- Hakon HAUGLI, Norway
- Tadeusz IWIŃSKI, Poland
- Patrick MORIAU, Belgium
- Indrek SAAR, Estonia
- Lord TOMLINSON, United Kingdom
- Zoran VUKCEVIC, Montenegro
- European Democrat Group (EDG)
- Alliance of Liberals and Democrats
for Europe (ALDE)
- Bernard
MARQUET, Monaco
- Fazil MUSTAPHA, Azerbaijan
- Andrea RIGONI, Italy
- European Commission for Democracy
through Law (Venice Commission)
- Serguei KOUZNETSOV, Administrator, Elections and Referendums
Division
- Secretariat
- Chemavon CHAHBAZIAN, Deputy
to the Head of the Interparliamentary Co-operation and Election Observation
Unit
- Franck DAESCHLER, Principal Administrative Assistant
Appendix 2 – Programme for
the observation of the parliamentary and early presidential elections
(open)
Friday
4 May 2012
08:15-08:45 Meeting of the ad hoc committee:
- Opening of the meeting and presentation
of the pre-election mission by Mr Jean-Charles Gardetto, Head of
Delegation
- Statements by other members of the pre-election mission
- Recent developments in the field of electoral legislation
and the activities of the Venice Commission in Serbia, by the Venice
Commission secretariat
09:00-09:15 Opening of
the joint meeting of the International Election Observation Mission:
09:15-10:30 Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR Limited Election Observation
Mission:
- Ms Corien Jonker,
Head of the OSCE/ODIHR LEOM
- Core Team Analysts
10:00-10:05 Welcoming
remarks by Ms Slavica Đukić-Dejanović, Speaker of Parliament and
Acting President of Serbia
10:30-11:00 Democratic Party (DS) – Mr Nenad Konstantinović,
DS President of the Competent Board for Justice
11:00-11:30 Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) – MsTijana Vukomanović,
SPS Vice-President
11:30-12:00 Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) – Mr Marko Đurić,
Member of the SNS Main Board
12:00 -12:30 Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) – Ms Judita Popović,
Member of the LDP Presidency, Vice-President of the Parliament
12:30-13:00 Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) – Mr Slobodan
Samardžić, DSS Vice-President
14:30-15:00 United Regions of Serbia (URS) – Ms Suzana Grubješić,
Vice-President
15:00-16:00 Minority issues:
- Mr Vladimir Bilandžić, Special Advisor, Confidence and
Security Building Measures, OSCE Mission to Serbia
- Mr Vitomir Mihajlović, President of the National Council
of the Roma National Minority
16:00-17:00 –
Mr Marko Blagojević, Director of the Center for Free Elections and
Democracy (CeSID)
18:00 Reception hosted by the Italian Ambassador, H.E. Armando
Varricchio
Saturday 5 May 2012
09:15-09:45 Ad hoc committee meeting: Deployment and practical
matters
10:00-10:30 Mr Miodrag Petrović, member of the Republic Electoral
Commission
10:30-11:30 Round table with media representatives
- Mr Saša Mirković, Director of
the TV B92
- Mr Zoran Stanojević, Editor, Radio Television of Serbia
- Mr Predrag Mihailović, Deputy Executive Editor, Newspaper
Blic
- Mr Dragan Janjić, Vice-President of the Independent Journalist
Association of Serbia (NUNS)
- Ms Dragona Solomon, Office of the OSCE
11:30-12:30
Round table with NGO representatives:
Sunday 6 May 2012
All day Observation of the elections
Monday 7 May 2012
09:00-10:00 Debriefing meeting of the ad hoc committee on
election day observations
10:30-11:30 Meeting of the Heads of delegations
13:30 Press Conference (Media Centre)
Appendix 3 – Statement by
the International Election Observation Mission (IEOM)
(open)
Serbia’s elections open and highly competitive,
additional transparency needed
Strasbourg, 07.05.2012 – Serbia’s parliamentary and early
presidential elections on 6 May 2012 took place in an open and competitive
environment but additional efforts are needed to improve the transparency
of the election process and the functioning of the media, international
observers said in a statement issued today.
Observers noted that voters were provided with a wide degree
of choice between various political options and contestants were
able to campaign freely. Most electoral stakeholders expressed a
high degree of confidence in the professionalism of the election
administration. On election day, commissions carried out their duties professionally.
Certain procedural problems were noted but no serious incidents
took place.
Media ownership lacks transparency and there is a need to
have more balanced and analytical coverage.
The introduction of a single unified voter register was a
positive step but its implementation started late and there appeared
to be some lack of transparency in the compilation of the register.
“These were open and competitive
elections, thanks to the legal reforms implemented over the last
few years. I’m glad to say that the citizens of Serbia are moving
forward on their path to building a fully-fledged democracy to face
the challenges ahead,” said Matteo Mecacci, the Special Co-ordinator
who led the short-term OSCE observer mission.
“The elections in Serbia addressed most of the Council
of Europe standards for democratic elections. The citizens made
their choice freely among a large number of parties and presidential
candidates. Nevertheless, the media coverage could have been more
balanced. Regarding the transparency of campaign financing, the
PACE delegation looks forward to the report of the Anti-Corruption
Agency on this issue,” said Jean-Charles Gardetto, the Head of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) delegation.
“It welcomes the efforts of the international community
and those of Belgrade and Prishtina which allowed the Serbian citizens
of Kosovo* to exercise their right to vote,” he added.
Corien
Jonker, the Head of the OSCE/ODIHR Limited Election Observation
Mission, said: “We were happy that the elections took place in a
calm environment. We are also pleased to see that there is high
confidence in the electoral process. At the same time, it is clear
from our long-term observation that greater transparency is vital to
maintain and further develop this confidence, which is necessary
for a vibrant democracy. Here the role of citizens is key: they
should insist upon greater openness from their institutions.”
__________
* All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions
or population, in this text shall be understood in full compliance
with United Nations Resolution
1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.