Update
Polling stations
There are 8,392 polling stations, 119 more than in 2023; for 18 per cent of them the area voters com...
Position of domestic observers
In the second part of the campaign the position of domestic observers deteriorated further. The negative campaign by the authorities and pro-government media stigmatises independent election observation.
Challenges to independent observation have escalated from claims of bias to calls for arrests, a ban on the work of CRTA Election Observation Mission and financial checks on it. These messages came from the highest political levels, pro-government media relayed them in coordinated waves, and incidents in which observers were obstructed in their work were recorded in the field.
On several occasions Aleksandar Vučić presented CRTA as a political actor rather than an observer. At the end of September he stated that CRTA “is no objective observer” and that its people are “active participants in the ‘colour revolution’”, and at the beginning of October that “those from CRTA are a significant part of the ‘colour revolution’”. The Speaker of the National Assembly, Ana Brnabić, told citizens: “don't listen to CRTA's assessments”, and on 8 October, at a press conference in front of the Assembly, she asked the Agency for Prevention of Corruption (ACAS) to investigate CRTA's activities, alleging foreign funding and support for the Student List. These statements were accompanied by demands from other actors: the association Savet za monitoring issued the call to “urgently arrest a representative of CRTA”, and the author of the “NVO Hidra” campaign, Vukša Dragović, who was twice received by the Speaker of the National Assembly in August, stated that “the work of this criminal organisation must be banned”.
Pro-government media relayed and multiplied these messages. Between 1 and 18 October CRTA was mentioned in 274 articles in the most influential pro-government online media - 85 per cent of the items were negative, while only ten per cent consisted of statements by the organisation itself. CRTA was almost always presented together with the Student List and the “blokaderi” (blockaders), which recast an observation organisation as an electoral contestant and an opponent of the authorities. The waves of coverage were coordinated: the same headlines appeared on four to six portals within a few hours of one another, as in the case of the headline “CRTA publishes a report designed to deceive the people”, published on 7 October, the day before CRTA Election Observation Mission published its first report on the observation of the campaign.
Challenges to independent observation have escalated from claims of bias to calls for arrests, a ban on the work of CRTA Election Observation Mission and financial checks on it. These messages came from the highest political levels, pro-government media relayed them in coordinated waves, and incidents in which observers were obstructed in their work were recorded in the field.
On several occasions Aleksandar Vučić presented CRTA as a political actor rather than an observer. At the end of September he stated that CRTA “is no objective observer” and that its people are “active participants in the ‘colour revolution’”, and at the beginning of October that “those from CRTA are a significant part of the ‘colour revolution’”. The Speaker of the National Assembly, Ana Brnabić, told citizens: “don't listen to CRTA's assessments”, and on 8 October, at a press conference in front of the Assembly, she asked the Agency for Prevention of Corruption (ACAS) to investigate CRTA's activities, alleging foreign funding and support for the Student List. These statements were accompanied by demands from other actors: the association Savet za monitoring issued the call to “urgently arrest a representative of CRTA”, and the author of the “NVO Hidra” campaign, Vukša Dragović, who was twice received by the Speaker of the National Assembly in August, stated that “the work of this criminal organisation must be banned”.
Pro-government media relayed and multiplied these messages. Between 1 and 18 October CRTA was mentioned in 274 articles in the most influential pro-government online media - 85 per cent of the items were negative, while only ten per cent consisted of statements by the organisation itself. CRTA was almost always presented together with the Student List and the “blokaderi” (blockaders), which recast an observation organisation as an electoral contestant and an opponent of the authorities. The waves of coverage were coordinated: the same headlines appeared on four to six portals within a few hours of one another, as in the case of the headline “CRTA publishes a report designed to deceive the people”, published on 7 October, the day before CRTA Election Observation Mission published its first report on the observation of the campaign.
The position of domestic election observers in law and in practice
Domestic observers have been observing elections in Serbia since 1997, but they acquired statutory status only with the 2022 electoral laws. Accreditation may be obtained by associations registered in Serbia whose aims lie in the field of elections. Their observers may follow the work of all bodies administering the elections and the handling of ballot papers, but cannot themselves initiate proceedings for the protection of electoral rights. Although the statutory regulation was a major step forward, the position of observers is deteriorating in practice. In recent electoral cycles the most senior officials and pro-government media have discredited them, among other things with claims that they are working towards “overthrowing the constitutional order of Serbia”. CRTA's observers have also been physically attacked in the past, as in Odžaci on election day in 2023, and the absence of an institutional response leaves an impression of impunity. At the local elections in 2025 and 2026 a large number of domestic and foreign observation missions appeared, linked to both the authorities and the opposition. CRTA Election Observation Mission therefore warned of the increasingly frequent misuse of independent observation.
International Election Observation Mission (IEOM)
The international observation mission will observe the elections in Serbia at full strength. The observation mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), which began long-term observation on 16 September, will be joined on election day by observers from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and the European Parliament.
ODIHR's interim report
On 9 October 2026 ODIHR published its interim report, in which it notes that the elections are taking place in the shadow of a protracted political crisis and deep polarisation.110 Although the electoral legal framework has been amended four times, a number of earlier recommendations, including priority ones, have still not been fulfilled, above all those concerning pressure on voters, misuse of public resources, oversight of campaign finance, the independence of the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media (REM) and the safety of journalists. The report also records concern about the unusually large numbers of voters registered in certain municipalities and at certain addresses, while the competent ministry has not publicly explained these irregularities. Particular emphasis is placed on the increasingly hostile environment for civil society: domestic observers report public pressure, as well as verbal and physical attacks by representatives of the ruling parties, and the report recalls the attacks on observers in Mionica (November 2025) and Bor (March 2026). ODIHR also states that on 29 September, on TV Informer, Aleksandar Vučić accused domestic observers of representing “Western services” and of taking part in a “colour revolution”.
110 OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, Republic of Serbia, Early Parliamentary Elections, 25 October 2026: ODIHR Election Observation Mission Interim Report, https://link.crta.rs/nterim26
Statement by the PACE pre-electoral mission
A delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe made a two-day pre-electoral visit to Serbia on 12 and 13 October and assessed that the campaign for the early parliamentary elections of 25 October is taking place in a deeply polarised, referendum-like environment that may jeopardise a level playing field for contestants.111 It highlighted as the main problems the deeply entrenched practice of early elections, insufficient implementation of ODIHR and Venice Commission recommendations, misuse of public resources, pressure on voters, misuse of the provisions on minority lists and media coverage favouring the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS). In addition, it pointed to doubts about the accuracy of the voter register, the risk that voters abroad would be left without the right to vote because there are too few polling stations, as well as to hostile rhetoric and smear campaigns against the opposition, civil society and journalists, with credible allegations that they are being placed under surveillance and wiretapped.
111 Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, “A PACE pre-electoral delegation highlights a highly polarised campaign ahead of Serbia’s early parliamentary elections”, https://link.crta.rs/17r
For Aleksandar Vučić and government officials, foreign observation missions that apply an international methodology appeared in the final stage of the campaign as yet another potential threat to the integrity of the elections, rather than as a guarantee of that integrity. Their impartiality was challenged in advance.
On 17 October the Speaker of the National Assembly, Ana Brnabić, announced an official complaint to the European Parliament. She said that its mission was “anything but impartial”, that the head of the delegation, Andreas Schieder, “is openly working against Vučić” and that “half or more than half” of its members do not meet the requirements for observing. As her reason for reacting before election day she said “so that it isn't the case tomorrow, when they come out with some results, that we didn't say so”. In the same appearance she placed ODIHR, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the missions of the Russian Duma and of the parliament of Azerbaijan on the same footing, as if they were equally authoritative observers, https://link.crta.rs/17s
Aleksandar Vučić also stated that ODIHR and the Council of Europe supposedly do not observe the elections but use “the reports CRTA sends them”, claiming that they do not want to meet him and that for that reason nobody from the “United Serbia” list would be seen with representatives of these missions.
Republika, “NOBODY FROM OUR LIST WILL RECEIVE ODIHR AND THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE, BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT TO BE SEEN WITH ME: Vučić's message before the elections”, https://link.crta.rs/17t
In its needs assessment mission report for the parliamentary elections in Serbia, ODIHR warned of the risk posed by politically biased observers. OSCE/ODIHR, Serbia - 2026 parliamentary elections: needs assessment mission report, 30 July 2026. What is at issue is not only their presence, but the possibility that their statements will be presented as the assessment of “international observers” and thereby relativise the findings of missions that apply international standards. CRTA calls on the media and institutions to distinguish clearly between these two kinds of assessment, and on the REC to publish, for each accredited organisation, its seat, registration data, the number of observers and the entity at whose invitation they came.
In its needs assessment mission report for the parliamentary elections in Serbia, ODIHR warned of the risk posed by politically biased observers. OSCE/ODIHR, Serbia - 2026 parliamentary elections: needs assessment mission report, 30 July 2026. What is at issue is not only their presence, but the possibility that their statements will be presented as the assessment of “international observers” and thereby relativise the findings of missions that apply international standards. CRTA calls on the media and institutions to distinguish clearly between these two kinds of assessment, and on the REC to publish, for each accredited organisation, its seat, registration data, the number of observers and the entity at whose invitation they came.
