After over a decade in power and a series of convincing election victories, the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) has become the financially strongest political party in Serbia. For example, it could have financed the usual operating costs of 38 other parties and citizens’ groups over the past nine years using solely the budget funds it received for its regular operations and still have some spare change left.
Data from CINS’s Party Funds database, which includes all income and expenses of political parties from 2015 to the end of 2023, reveal that during this period, SNS received approximately 49.2 million EUR from the budget for regular operations, while other parties spent about 46.5 million EUR for the same purpose. The remaining 38 parties and citizens’ groups include those that form the ruling majority alongside SNS, such as the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS). This means that if one were to compare the finances of the parties in the ruling coalition with those of the opposition, the gap would be even larger.
Out of the 40 major parties and citizens’ groups in the database, one has never spent money on regular operations – the citizens’ group gathered around Vuk Jeremić in 2017.
In general, parties receive money to finance their regular operations only if they pass the electoral threshold and win seats in a local, provincial, or the national assembly. Election results determine the amount of money they receive, with distribution based on the number of votes they secure.
Thanks to its electoral results, SNS managed to secure its financial dominance. This financial superiority has, among other things, enabled the party to purchase real estate in Serbia worth approximately 1.9 million EUR, as reported by CINS in 2021. These properties not only serve the party’s needs but are also valuable because they can be used as collateral for loans, or they can be rented out or sold.
We also wrote about how the Serbian Progressive Party amended the Law on Financing Political Activities in 2014, allowing the use of funds intended for regular operation accounts for electoral purposes. As Nemanja Nenadić from the organization Transparency Serbia told CINS at the time, these changes apply to all parties, but their effect is most noticeable in the example of SNS.
“They probably used this the most because they have the most MPs, which allowed them to transfer the largest amounts,” says Nenadić.
Lawyer Vladimir Tupanjac, who previously worked in the Sector for Monitoring the Financing of Political Activities at the Anti-Corruption Agency, says this demonstrates that there is no equality in political life in Serbia.
“Given that ideas and ideologies have certainly disappeared, I think it can be said that those who have more money win elections.”
“Wealthiest” list
In addition to budget funds for regular operations, political parties also receive funding for election campaigns. They can also raise money independently from other sources, such as donations from individuals and legal entities, membership fees, property rentals, or so-called “other” income, which includes anything not fitting into the aforementioned categories. This income may come from interest, property sales, or the recovery of legal costs following court proceedings.
Based on all these sources, the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) generated a total revenue of approximately 76.1 million EUR over nine years, of which around 68.1 million EUR came from the state budget. The remainder mainly came from donations, about whose questionable legality CINS has previously reported.
The Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) ranks second in revenue. Between 2015 and the end of 2023, it generated around 25.7 million EUR in income. The difference between budget funds and other income is smaller than in SNS’s case. SPS received about 13.3 million EUR from the budget and an additional 12.4 million EUR from citizens, property rentals, and other sources. CINS has reported that SPS inherited a significant number of properties across Serbia, earning approximately 3.8 million EUR from renting them over the past nine years.
Some of their “tenants” include public institutions, which experts that spoke to CINS consider unacceptable, viewing it as yet another way for the party to extract funds from the budget.
All other political actors lag far behind these two parties in terms of revenue.
Nevertheless, the financial power of the ruling party could even be much bigger because party reports do not account for other revenues that are either illegal or fall into gray areas. For instance, a CINS journalist infiltrated a ruling party-linked call center in November last year, ahead of parliamentary and local elections. Each day, over 100 people called citizens to ask if they would vote for SNS. Payments for this work were handed out in cash, and CINS’s journalist was twice offered what is colloquially known as “vote-buying.”
SNS denied any connection to this call center, a claim that was accepted by the Anti-Corruption Agency. The prosecution is still investigating the case.
Vladimir Tupanjac points out in addition to budget revenues, the ruling party has other resources available.
He lists pro-government media (which are later privileged in receiving budget funds through grants), official campaigns, the misuse of public resources for the ruling party’s benefit, black funds, and financing by so-called “third parties.”
“All of this constitutes financial power. If you can secure someone a job, it implies the use of state resources. The person financing this third party or the black fund does so because they have previously been provided with public funds through public procurement, enabling them to make a profit, part of which they then give back to the party.”
The issue is that many instances of abuse go unpunished, which CINS has also reported on.
Most Spent on Pink
Political parties allocate the majority of their funds to overhead and “other” expenses, as well as election campaign financing.
Data gathered by CINS shows that SNS has spent by far the most money on advertising during campaigns over the past nine years, with these expenses dominating their overall spending. Out of a total expenditure of nearly 75.2 million EUR, SNS spent 30.3 million EUR on advertising.
The biggest beneficiary of this spending by the ruling party in Serbia is the television network Pink, which received approximately 8.4 million EUR from SNS – more than what was paid to Prva, B92, and Happy TV combined.
Behind Pink, the next largest recipient of SNS advertising funds during election campaigns is RTS, which received nearly 5.4 million EUR over these nine years.
However, the data in these reports does not provide a complete picture. CINS’s investigation revealed that by using leased time slots instead of standard promotional ads on Pink, the ruling party achieved significantly cheaper advertisement during pre-election campaigns. This resulted in SNS avoiding payments of over 2.8 million EUR during the 2020 and 2022 election cycles
Tamara Skrozza, a member of the Complaints Commission of the Press Council, explained to CINS at the time that the purchasing of advertising space at preferential prices renders the democratic process meaningless.
“Preferential advertising space during prime time is an indication that we have an unfair competition heading up to the election,” she stated.
She also noted that candidates who receive more airtime at discounted rates are eventually perceived by the public as the only viable option, which over time leads to acceptance without criticism.
CINS also reported that Pink and Happy TV wrote off over 800,000 EUR in debt owed by the Serbian Radical Party and that unpaid debts by parties after election campaigns are also not uncommon.
Other expenses and training
Political parties incurred expenses totaling approximately 27.6 million EUR listed under other expenses. In practice, party reports often fail to specify how this money was spent. For example, in 2018, the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) allocated around 845,000 EUR for “political marketing and research.” However, the report does not disclose the recipients of these funds.
This lack of transparency extends to the funds allocated for membership activities and training. Over the past nine years, parties have spent just under 9.4 million EUR on such initiatives, with SNS accounting for the largest share – around 4.6 million EUR.
The Law on Financing Political Activities stipulates that political entities must allocate at least 5% of their budget funding received for regular activities toward membership development or training.
For instance, the United Serbia party, previously led by Dragan Marković Palma, organized trips to Paralia, as well as visits to the Aqua Park and Wax Museum in Jagodina. The Serbian Radical Party printed books, while many parties funded various training programs for their members. Expenses also included receptions for Christmas holidays or bills for food and drinks.
However, the final destination of these funds is often unclear.
For example, SNS allocated about 410,000 EUR for member training in 2022, but the report does not specify the recipients.
A review by the State Audit Institution (DRI) revealed that approximately 37,000 EUR was paid to the German company Beust&Collegen International. One of the firm’s partners, Knut Fleckenstein, was a former Member of the European Parliament and a mediator in the dialogue between the Serbian government and the opposition. A foreign expert consulted by CINS suggested that Fleckenstein’s role in the dialogue could potentially indicate a conflict of interest. Another 370,000 EUR went to the London-based company Westminster Digital, tasked with training SNS officials and members in digital marketing. Their contracts with SNS ended less than a month before the 2022 elections.
Vladimir Tupanjac criticized this practice, arguing that it could withhold critical information from the public.
“Wherever significant sums are involved, particularly if the firms are suspicious, it is essential to demand detailed information, as it could point to possible corruption or other irregularities.”
Prijavite se na newsletter.
Thank you for sharing CINS’s articles! Please make sure to credit the Center for Investigative Journalism of Serbia and include a link to the article you are sharing.
For more information, visit: https://www.cins.rs/en/terms-of-use/
What do you think