At the beginning of the meeting, the OSCE representatives reminded the Board that the ODIHR Mission was invited by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to observe the elections, at the Republic of Serbia had signed and assumed the obligation to invite the Mission as a member of the OSCE.

It was also emphasised that the Mission is working at full capacity, that there are nine expert analysts in the core team, with another thirty long-term observers deployed all over Serbia, who meet with political parties and report on everything that is happening in the field. They also stated that on election day itself, 17 December 2023, there will be over two hundred observers at the polling stations. Two reports will be published, a preliminary report and a final report containing recommendations on what can be improved.

They proceeded to ask the members of the Supervisory Board to explain their activities in more detail since they are familiar with the provisions of the Law that stipulate its jurisdiction.

The members of the Supervisory Board said that there is an ongoing discussion on the topic of whether the President of the Republic can get involved, that is, whether he is involved in the election campaign, as well as whether the Board has a legal basis to act on the matter within its competences. Also, based on the discussion that lasted over the last two sessions, it was concluded that five members of the Supervisory Board believe that it is beyond the competence of the Board, two members abstained and three members believe that the Board has a legal basis within its competences to deal with and reacts to the cases in question.

It was emphasised that the Supervisory Board makes decisions by voting in accordance with the Rules of Procedure that were adopted at the beginning of the current composition.

Board member Dr Jovanka Matic noted that the article of the Law on the Election of MPs which prescribes the establishment of the Supervisory Board as a temporary body for the observation the election campaign, has not been followed for many years and that the Supervisory Board was established for the first time only in 2020.

The members of the Board expressed the view that the main problem of this body is not insufficiently specified competences, but the way in which the body was established, i.e. its composition, since out of ten members, five members are appointed at the proposal of the Government of the Republic of Serbia, while the other five are nominated by the parliamentary clubs in the National Assembly, which are, in the Supervisory Board’s current composition, proposals of two parties of the ruling coalition and proposals of three parties of the opposition.

Board member Prof. Dr Branko Rakic pointed out that the 2020 composition had three representatives of national minority political parties - a representative of Albanians from the south of Serbia, a representative of Muslim Bosniaks from Sandzak and a representative of Hungarians from Vojvodina, which they consider very important in a multinational and multi-ethnic country like the Republic of Serbia and the composition of the Supervisory Board was not of one mind, adding that he was proposed as member of the Supervisory Board by the Government of the Republic of Serbia.

When asked how many press releases had the Supervisory Board issued so far, the Chairman explained that that depends on the number of objections, petitions and proposals received.

He also reminded all the members that the structure of the Supervisory Board is defined by the electoral will of the citizens, that is, by the structure of the parliamentary composition, and if we talk about the unanimity of one part of the appointed members, we can talk about the unanimity on the other part of the appointed members in the same way.

It was also noted that in the previous Supervisory Board composition, in 2022, many more objections and proposals were submitted by associations and political parties than is the case now and that the current Supervisory Board composition has more proactive members.

Board member Prof. Dr Miodrag Savovic stated that he does not feel like a political actor, that he was also proposed by the Government, not by a political party, and that his position is such that he exclusively focuses on the legal aspect.

It was pointed out that the functioning of the Supervisory Board should not be political in nature, given that the gap between different opinions is in fact a gap between the political and legal aspects, that certainly politics is a broader concept than law and that those who declare themselves from the political aspect believe that legal norms should not be strictly applied, and they use the phrase "to bypass the law and the norm a little in order to fulfil the role of the Supervisory Board." Also, the only way to overcome the mentioned gap is to respect the law and not take political positions.

The ODIHR representatives asked, speaking of the last topic discussed, what the arguments for and against were.

Regarding the issue of whether the Supervisory Board has the right to launch an initiative against the President of the Republic with the competent authority, the law explicitly foresees three cases in which this is possible. Therefore, there is no legal basis in the Law on the Election of MPs in that particular case, however, some members of the Board believe that it is possible to bring the case, if not under a legal basis, then under some political basis.

It was clarified that the activity of the Supervisory Board is to monitor the election process and its participants and that the President of the Republic is not a candidate in these elections.

The basic duty is to monitor whether the attitude towards all participants in the elections is fair, balanced and impartial, and some members of the Board have established numerous evidences of an absolutely unequal approach of the ruling party and the opposition parties, they did not deal with the President, but identified that the President is the one that most encourages an unequal, unjust and inequitable relationship. Also, the same members quite accidentally established, in addition to the unfair, biased, unbalanced relationship, that the President violates numerous regulations with his appearances.

It was pointed out that in order to better understand the views expressed, what the individual members of the Board present is their personal view, and not the view of the Supervisory Board, which was adopted by vote in accordance with the law and the Rules of Procedure.

Supervisory Board member Dr Jovanka Matic stated that one of the problems is that there is no meritorious material basis that helps to see what is happening in the election process and campaign, i.e. that there is no obligation to submit a report to the Supervisory Board and that everything is based on personal insights which are often limited, narrow and superficial.

Also, another problem was mentioned which was also noted by previous Supervisory Board compositions, concerns the irregularities that occur in the election process and conclusions that it is necessary to change the election laws in order to improve them for the next election cycle, but this was never implemented, that is, it remains only at the level of proposals and conclusions.

It was pointed out that the current Supervisory Board composition had issued two press statements, the first calling for a tolerant political dialogue in order to calm tensions and achieve a rational demographic debate, and the second condemning political disqualification based on political convictions, memberships in political organisations, without specifying specific individual cases.

The representatives of the OSCE were interested in whether the Supervisory Board’s press statements can have any binding character, to which it was clarified that through them it is possible to appeal and indicate to the relevant authorities to react within their competences, however the Supervisory Board does not have the authority to issue orders or to sanction anyone unless they implement a specific recommendation or suggestion.

The members of the Supervisory Board added that there is a case in which it would be binding, in accordance with Article 146, paragraph 3 of the Law on the Election of MPs.

It was also stated that the previous Supervisory Board composition had adopted a document concerning dignitary campaign, where the regulations constantly indicate that the election campaign primarily consists in presenting the political programmes of the parties.

Board member Prof. Dr Branko Rakic pointed out that neither the media that organise the presentations, nor the political parties themselves insist much on presenting the programmes of the political parties. It is not just an issue that somehow makes the election campaign more decent and normal, it is an issue of constitutional right, that is, human right, which is the right to vote. He believes that it is his right, as a citizen, as a voter, when it is necessary to declare who will exercise power in the next four years, to know what is in the programme of the political parties and what they offer in terms of ecology, agriculture, traffic, foreign policy, which for the most part he does not know. Also, he believes that it is the voter's right to know that those who organise the election campaign should meet, and that in our country the election campaign mostly consists of slogans, accusations, discrediting, without what is the essence.

Prof. Dr Miodrag Savovic pointed out that the question was raised, given that the ODIHR representatives spoke about human rights, that the Supervisory Board deals with the equal treatment of all people who vote, what is the position of the OSCE mission dealing with the elections in Kosovo-Metohija, and whose body ODIHR is, regarding the impossibility of voters in Kosovo-Metohija to exercise their basic human right due to the fact that they have to travel kilometres to vote.

The representatives of ODIHR stated that the mandate of their Mission is not to give any assessments for any part of the election process, that they are still meeting with various parties and that a complete report will be made a few months after the elections.

The members of the Supervisory Board added that they will also consolidate the results of their work through their report which will be available to all interested parties on a subpage on the National Assembly's website.

When asked how the work of the next Supervisory Board composition could be changed and improved, the members of the Supervisory Board pointed to the importance of understanding democracy and pluralism of opinion, which should be placed above one's own views, without rigidity, single-mindedness and exclusivity. They also noted that perhaps the Supervisory Board as a permanent and not a temporary body with more executive powers would be more effective in its future work, which requires an amendment to the law.

The following participated in the discussion: Supervisory Board Chairman Svetislav Goncic and Supervisory Board members: Prof. Dr Miodrag Savovic, Dr Slobodan Prvanovic, MA Vojin Vucicevic, Prof. Dr Dragan Vucinic, Prof. Dr Bojan Tubic, Dr Jovanka Matic and Prof. Dr Branko Rakic.