MCCM
RESILIENCE
OUR MEDIA
To address salient forms of pressure against independent media, weakening of democratic governance principles, and violations of human rights, an urgent and systemic response is needed in Serbia.
These are key messages of the publication Serbia: Risk Assessment of the Regulation of Digital Platforms and Media in the Digital Environment [in Serbian] by SEENPM, produced within a UNESCO project “Building Trust in Media in South East Europe: Support to Journalism as a Public Good”, financed by the EU.
The Risk Assessment is based on an analysis of legislative and policy monitoring processes conducted from December 2024 to May 2025.
The findings map systemic human rights and rule-of-law risks linked to digital platforms and media regulation in Serbia – risks that demand serious attention from policymakers at both regional and international levels to safeguard freedom of expression and access to information.
According to the Risk Assessment, areas of critical pressure highlight where immediate stakeholders’ action is needed in Serbia’s digital platform regulation and media landscape, including:
- Leadership under scrutiny – Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media’s (REM) credibility is fragile, and the institution’s Council appointment process must regain integrity and legitimacy.
- Institutional readiness – Regulatory bodies and competent institutions face political pressure and capacity gaps that, together, limit independence and effective functioning.
- Trust-based, multistakeholder-driven processes – The lack of meaningful and goodwill cooperation of state and non-state actors seriously threatens the legislative and policy process, and hampers future alignment with the EU acquis.
- Safe, inclusive participation – Civil society and media actors face serious intimidation: pressures, direct threats, and physical attacks, which jeopardise meaningful democratic public participation.
The publication is part of a broader series of studies in local languages covering Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, and Türkiye.
The integral – regional collection publication [in English]: Regulating Digital Platforms and Media in the Digital Environment: Risk Assessments
Systemic Strains: Eroded Institutions Amplify Digital Risks
The Risk Assessment findings underscore a central tension: the context in which regulation is introduced is critical. If misapplied, platform regulation could seriously undermine the digital information ecosystem, particularly in the country marked by institutional and media distortion — from media capture and information manipulation to various forms of physical and digital assaults against journalists, including SLAPPs.
Serbia’s media and digital governance challenges stem from a weakened rule-of-law environment, stalled EU reforms, eroded institutional independence, and depleted public trust in an environment of sustained democratic backsliding.
Although legal frameworks are often aligned with EU standards, institutional readiness and, by extension, enforcement, remain ineffective and vulnerable to political interference. In the field of media and access to information, this is reflected in systemic risks such as media capture, stalled media reforms, the lack of transparency and a genuine commitment to support media freedom and a vibrant information ecosystem, coupled with ineffective, politically captured key institutions such as REM.
Lawmaking processes lack openness and meaningful stakeholder involvement, while media reform continues to evolve without securing the independence of public broadcasters, with serious limitations to media pluralism, editorial independence, widespread impunity, and narrative control.
At the same time, risks in AI, cybersecurity, and digital governance are intensifying. Regulatory developments in these areas are advancing without sufficient transparency or human rights safeguards, while expanding digital infrastructure is increasing state surveillance capabilities. Weak enforcement of personal data protection mechanisms, exclusion of independent actors from oversight, and centralized decision-making create space for human rights violations, including media freedom.
Without recalibrating the state politics so that it becomes capable and willing to uphold democratic standards and the basic rule of law principles, these overlapping risks will continue to undermine media freedom, digital rights, and democratic governance in Serbia.
From Risk to Reform: What Must Change
To address these interrelated risks and reinforce media freedom, digital rights, and democratic governance, the following key recommendations are put forward:
- Ensure that digital platform regulation is rooted in the international human rights protection framework – Serbia should continue aligning with the Digital Services Act – by embedding institutional independence, transparent decision-making and the inclusion of all stakeholders, while preserving fundamental freedom of expression safeguards. The EU and international actors must monitor the situation and provide stewardship, ensuring a framework respectful of human rights and civil society participation, while preventing law-enabled censorship.
- Depoliticise REM appointments – Council members should be selected through transparent, publicly documented criteria, free from political influence, to restore the regulator’s independence and credibility.
- Protect media pluralism and public broadcasting – Amendments to media laws must secure editorial and financial autonomy, follow international standards, and be shaped through open consultations with media professionals and independent experts.
- Ensure accountability for disinformation – State-aligned tabloids spreading hate speech and in other ways disregarding the Serbian Journalists’ Code of Ethics and media laws must face legal consequences, while self-regulation (e.g., the Press Council) must be urgently strengthened.
- Strengthen safeguards, oversight, and transparency in digital governance – Serbia must comply with the existing legislative framework that prohibits the use of certain forms of digital surveillance technologies and enable access to fair trial and redress mechanisms to those targeted by these technologies, while ensuring strict legal safeguards, judicial oversight, and proportionality in all surveillance practices. Also, the authorities must reinforce data protection oversight through the proactive enforcement of GDPR-aligned standards, particularly in state-led digital initiatives.
- Embed civil society oversight in AI and cybersecurity – AI and cybersecurity frameworks must include civil society participation and mandatory impact assessments prior to adoption.
- Halt restrictive criminal law reforms – Any proposed changes that may limit freedom of expression should not proceed.
- Ensure inclusive civil society participation – NGOs and media actors must be fully involved in shaping digital platform regulation and governance frameworks to restore democratic principles, trust, and goodwill in policy processes.
Systemic Strains: Eroded Institutions Amplify Digital Risks
The Risk Assessment findings underscore a central tension: the context in which regulation is introduced is critical. If misapplied, platform regulation could seriously undermine the digital information ecosystem, particularly in the country marked by institutional and media distortion — from media capture and information manipulation to various forms of physical and digital assaults against journalists, including SLAPPs.
Serbia’s media and digital governance challenges stem from a weakened rule-of-law environment, stalled EU reforms, eroded institutional independence, and depleted public trust in an environment of sustained democratic backsliding.
Although legal frameworks are often aligned with EU standards, institutional readiness and, by extension, enforcement, remain ineffective and vulnerable to political interference. In the field of media and access to information, this is reflected in systemic risks such as media capture, stalled media reforms, the lack of transparency and a genuine commitment to support media freedom and a vibrant information ecosystem, coupled with ineffective, politically captured key institutions such as REM.
Lawmaking processes lack openness and meaningful stakeholder involvement, while media reform continues to evolve without securing the independence of public broadcasters, with serious limitations to media pluralism, editorial independence, widespread impunity, and narrative control.
At the same time, risks in AI, cybersecurity, and digital governance are intensifying. Regulatory developments in these areas are advancing without sufficient transparency or human rights safeguards, while expanding digital infrastructure is increasing state surveillance capabilities. Weak enforcement of personal data protection mechanisms, exclusion of independent actors from oversight, and centralized decision-making create space for human rights violations, including media freedom.
Without recalibrating the state politics so that it becomes capable and willing to uphold democratic standards and the basic rule of law principles, these overlapping risks will continue to undermine media freedom, digital rights, and democratic governance in Serbia.
From Risk to Reform: What Must Change
To address these interrelated risks and reinforce media freedom, digital rights, and democratic governance, the following key recommendations are put forward:
- Ensure that digital platform regulation is rooted in the international human rights protection framework – Serbia should continue aligning with the Digital Services Act – by embedding institutional independence, transparent decision-making and the inclusion of all stakeholders, while preserving fundamental freedom of expression safeguards. The EU and international actors must monitor the situation and provide stewardship, ensuring a framework respectful of human rights and civil society participation, while preventing law-enabled censorship.
- Depoliticise REM appointments – Council members should be selected through transparent, publicly documented criteria, free from political influence, to restore the regulator’s independence and credibility.
- Protect media pluralism and public broadcasting – Amendments to media laws must secure editorial and financial autonomy, follow international standards, and be shaped through open consultations with media professionals and independent experts.
- Ensure accountability for disinformation – State-aligned tabloids spreading hate speech and in other ways disregarding the Serbian Journalists’ Code of Ethics and media laws must face legal consequences, while self-regulation (e.g., the Press Council) must be urgently strengthened.
- Strengthen safeguards, oversight, and transparency in digital governance – Serbia must comply with the existing legislative framework that prohibits the use of certain forms of digital surveillance technologies and enable access to fair trial and redress mechanisms to those targeted by these technologies, while ensuring strict legal safeguards, judicial oversight, and proportionality in all surveillance practices. Also, the authorities must reinforce data protection oversight through the proactive enforcement of GDPR-aligned standards, particularly in state-led digital initiatives.
- Embed civil society oversight in AI and cybersecurity – AI and cybersecurity frameworks must include civil society participation and mandatory impact assessments prior to adoption.
- Halt restrictive criminal law reforms – Any proposed changes that may limit freedom of expression should not proceed.
- Ensure inclusive civil society participation – NGOs and media actors must be fully involved in shaping digital platform regulation and governance frameworks to restore democratic principles, trust, and goodwill in policy processes.
Measuring the Danger: A Custom Framework for Mapping Digital Governance Risks
The assessment is based on a bespoke, replicable risk matrix, structured around three risk groups:
- Misalignment with international standards of human rights protection and rule of law;
- External and internal risks: external risks stem from the broader context (e.g. political climate or potential misuse), while internal risks arise from the regulation itself, including legal gaps, weak or missing redress mechanisms, and loopholes;
- Legislative process factors refer to risks related to how a law or policy is developed, including transparency, stakeholder and expert involvement, and potential political influence during drafting and adoption.
Serbia: Risk Assessment of the Regulation of Digital Platforms and Media in the Digital Environment [in Serbian]
The integral – regional collection publication [in English]: Regulating Digital Platforms and Media in the Digital Environment: Risk Assessments
This article was produced within the UNESCO project “Building Trust in Media in South East Europe: Support to Journalism as a Public Good”, financed by the EU.
The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this article do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO or the European Union concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
The authors are responsible for the choice and presentation of the facts contained in this article and for the opinions expressed therein, which are not necessarily those of UNESCO or the European Union and do not commit the Organization.
