In early July 2020, Serbia saw major public unrest at the height of the second wave of the coronavirus pandemic. Originally peaceful protests turned violent, with instances of police brutality shocking the general population. These protests uncovered a deep dissatisfaction with the ruling regime, and the growing authoritarianism of the populist Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), led by president Aleksandar Vucic, who has ruled the country since 2012. The regime has been involved in numerous scandals, ranging from illegal weapon trafficking to suspicious attacks on journalists. In the last 8 years, Vucic has tightened his grip on the media and has managed to almost fully disunite and silence opposition to his rule.
ELECTIONS AND COVID-19
After having one of the strictest lockdowns in Europe and a decrease in COVID-19 cases in May, Vucic declared a “victory over coronavirus,” followed by a swift relaxation of containment measures. By allowing mass gatherings - parties, weddings, and even a football match attended by 25,000 spectators - and reporting consistently low numbers of confirmed cases, the government established a sense of normality with one goal in mind: holding elections on 21 June 2020.
People were encouraged to vote, with politicians and experts claiming the virus had “weakened” and no longer presented any danger. The ruling SNS party won a staggering 61% of the vote in a campaign marked by the boycott of major opposition parties, mainly due to undemocratic electoral conditions and alleged vote rigging in favour of SNS. With only three parties passing the electoral threshold, two of which were government coalition partners, Serbia’s political landscape is increasingly resembling that of one-party states. With no parliamentary opposition and a variety of tactics used by SNS, including nepotism, intimidation, and corruption, it is evident that authoritarian rule is creeping over Serbia.
The latest 2020 Freedom House report concluded that Serbia has lost its “fully free” status. It highlighted the crackdown on freedom of expression and thought as evidence of increasing authoritarianism. It also flagged the ever-growing pressure on constitutionally-independent institutions such as the judiciary, and noted a general trend towards diminishing democracy, which is similar in style to Viktor Orban’s Hungary. The European Union has expressed no concern over electoral conditions and continues supporting Vucic’s rule. Almost immediately after the elections, COVID-19 cases increased at a rapid rate, and a four-day long curfew was subsequently announced in early July. This was followed by a series of protests in Belgrade which were marked by police brutality, the arrest of 71 protesters and the scrapping of the proposed curfew.
UNCERTAIN FUTURE FOR VUCIC’S RULE
While most Western and Serbian government-controlled media claimed that the protests came as a backlash against the proposed coronavirus-containment measures, in reality, the protests were an opportunity for the people to express their discontent regarding the power-hungry nature of the ruling regime and its incompetence in handling the pandemic. Peaceful demonstrations turned into violent clashes with police forces, with instances of tear gas being used against protesters. Numerous videos posted on social media show incidents in which police officers used excessive force, with concerns raised about police brutality in a country in the heart of Europe. The regime seems to increasingly use law enforcement as a tool for suppressing opposing voices and intimidating potential challengers to Vucic’s rule.
Although the protests have calmed down, increased police presence and surveillance is noticeable throughout Belgrade. Events from early July have shown that the government is capable of brutally responding to any apparent citizen’s unrest. Fear and instability appear to lurk beneath the surface of Serbian politics, as Serbia’s democratic future remains uncertain.
Aleksandar is an LLB Law with Politics student at the University of Manchester, about to enter his final year. He has aspirations towards working in diplomacy and foreign affairs in the future with a particular interest in Public International Law, Human Rights Law and International Relations.