This Anti-Corruption Helpdesk brief was produced in response to a query from the European Commission. The Anti-Corruption Helpdesk is operated by Transparency International and funded by the European Union.
Query
Can you provide an overview of and background to recent measures taken to address political corruption in Serbia? We are particularly interested in elections, political party financing, codes of conduct, asset declaration, immunity, conflict of interest and lobbying.
Content
1 Overview of political corruption in Serbia
2 Elections
3 Party financing
4 Immunity
5 Codes of conduct for politicians
6 Conflict of interest
7 Asset declaration
8 Lobbying
9 References
Summary
The fight against corruption has been a priority on the political agenda in Serbia since 2002 and an important pre-condition for accession to the European Union. In recent years, Serbia has strengthened the legislative and institutional framework for fighting corruption and, in the last two years, has launched an anti-corruption campaign resulting in an increased number of corruption related prosecutions and highly publicised arrests of prominent political figures and former government officials.
The laws adopted in recent years bring greater control in the area of public procurement, conflict of interest, financing of political parties, as well as increased capacity among the agencies responsible for investigating and prosecuting corruption. However, effective enforcement of the existing anti-corruption legislation and oversight exercised by the relevant public bodies is still weak. Corruption remains a serious problem affecting public and economic life, and further reforms, with sustained efforts, are needed to effectively detect, prevent and sanction corruption acts.
This answer analyses Serbia’s efforts in the fight against political corruption by identifying challenges and progress in the areas of elections, party financing, immunities, codes of conduct, conflicts of interest, asset declaration and lobbying.
Authors
Tinatin Ninua, Transparency International, [email protected]Reviewers
Marie Chêne, Transparency International; Casey Kelso, Transparency InternationalDate
26/03/2014
