The members of the European Parliament will vote on a Resolution about Serbian elections on 8 February. The resolution followed debates in the plenum and EP Foreign Affairs Committee (AFET), where MPs mostly criticized the elections held in Serbia on 17 December. International and local observer missions documented serious electoral irregularities, with the most significant ones observed in the local elections in Belgrade. According to CRTA, organized voter migrations occurred to an extent that crucially influenced the outcome of the very close elections for the Belgrade City Assembly.
About the Serbian elections, the EP Resolution on Serbia, as well as the opposition request for international investigation we spoke with MEPs from the Socialists and Democrats (S&D) Group, Matjaž Nemec.
European Western Balkans: During the debate in the European Parliament, you said that you cannot imagine the future of the EU without Serbia. Considering the current state of democracy, how feasible is Serbia’s progress on the path to the EU?
Matjaž Nemec: It is true, the idea of the European Union without Serbia and other countries of the Western Balkans being part of it is difficult for me to imagine in the future. The enlargement to the Balkans is strategically very important for the EU, especially now when we are surrounded by conflicts and instability.
On the other hand, membership would bring many advantages and ultimately prosperity for the people in Serbia. In the end, our common goal is to live better and in peace. Therefore, the question is not so much whether I see Serbia in the Union, but rather whether the Serbian political leadership shares this proEU view. Is membership in the Union truly their ultimate goal?
Judging by many statements and actions of the ruling government, it seems that sitting on multiple chairs at once—from Russian, Chinese, American to European—pleases them greatly. Furthermore, it appears to benefit them in many ways, which should be alarming for the Union. The Union should not be just an ATM, in quotes, but rather a strategic partner that shares values of democracy, the rule of law, peace, freedom, and is aligned in foreign policy with the candidate country. At this moment, we need more honesty, political will, and tangible results from Serbia to be able to talk about a credible partner.
EWB: Do you expect increased engagement from the EU concerning elections and meeting the demands of citizens and the opposition for initiating an international investigation into electoral irregularities?
MN: I believe that our activation is crucial. Calls for an independent investigation are coming from the European Parliament, civil society in Serbia, and rightfully disappointed voters. Presidents of foreign affairs committees from 20 European countries are also urging action from the EU leadership. The pressure for institutions and the international community to intervene is significant. Our commitments and positions must not remain mere words on paper!
People in Serbia deserve democracy; many fight for it every day. Fair and free elections are the key to democratically elected authorities. Given all the accusations, testimonies, and recorded irregularities during the elections in December, it is impossible to speak about fairness and freedom.
EWB: How will the European elections in June impact the involvement of the European Parliament? Is there sufficient time for the EP to actively participate in an international investigation?
NM: The European elections this year will certainly to some extent slow down or temporarily interrupt ongoing policies and activities. Time is not on our side, but because of this, we in the European institutions are striving to finalize all important political achievements before June or May. The same applies to the enlargement policy and all related activities.
I hope that international and domestic experts will actively participate in the research. At the moment, it is not clear in what way we would involve European institutions or European parliamentarians. However, it is crucial to define the framework as soon as possible. We must act urgently, as I have already mentioned in previous responses: our commitments must not remain mere words on paper. I am also working towards this goal.
EWB: How do you assess the situation in Serbia after the elections? Can we speak about a deep political crisis?
MN: Serbia is in a deep political crisis. The atmosphere is toxic, highly polarized, and this is never good for a country. The elections have left behind a large number of disappointed people—individuals who wish for their voices to contribute to fairly elected representatives. They want their country to progress in a direction where they can prosper on their own.
However, we find ourselves in a situation where young people do not see a future in Serbia, where the majority of working people are underpaid, where non-governmental organizations are targets of political criticism and lies, and where the majority of the media landscape is under the control of those in power. I truly hope that among politicians, reason prevails, and that they will understand that the people and the country deserve more than this.
EWB: The opposition has yet to decide whether to accept mandates and enter the National Assembly. How do you view the possibility of another boycott of institutions?
NM: For me, boycott is not the solution, so I truly do not wish for this scenario. I believe that among the opposition, there is disappointment and a sense of injustice. However, by boycotting, you only give the opposing side even more power. Perseverance and sincere effort are also rewarded in politics in the end. I believe in this as well.