Serbian opposition figures and civil society representatives have raised concerns over a new initiative by Parliament Speaker Ana Brnabić targeting non-governmental organizations, warning that the campaign could signal intensified pressure on groups critical of President Aleksandar Vučić’s government.
Brnabić invited Vukša Dragović of the pro-sovereigntist group “Srpski suverenisti” to the Serbian Parliament for talks on the activities and financing of NGOs after Dragović claimed that around 80 foreign-funded organizations were allegedly involved in financing a “color revolution” in Serbia.
Brnabić said she was “shocked” by the amount of foreign funding reportedly received by NGOs and argued that the money was not being used for reforms but to exert pressure on the Serbian state and Vučić.
The initiative has drawn criticism from civil society organizations, which see the rhetoric as part of a broader campaign to discredit independent organizations and critical voices.
Raša Nedeljkov, program director of election-monitoring organization CRTA, described Brnabić’s move as a populist attempt to reduce the debate over civil society to questions about money and foreign funding.
“It is not, of course, the money that bothers them about authentic civil society,” Nedeljkov said, arguing that references to large sums of money are being used as a propaganda tool to discredit critical voices before the public.
He also accused the authorities of supporting organizations that present themselves as independent while receiving state funding, contrasting them with genuinely independent civil society groups.
Nedeljkov said the latest cooperation between Brnabić and Dragović should be viewed in the context of the Serbian government’s longstanding rhetoric about a supposed “color revolution.” He pointed to a 2021 cooperation mechanism between Russia and Serbia focused on combating what the two countries described as the threat of color revolutions.
According to Nedeljkov, Dragović’s sudden prominence in pro-government media suggests that the campaign against NGOs is not an entirely grassroots initiative.
“The campaign of discrediting and intimidation was designed at the top,” he said.
He also recalled a campaign against NGOs in Serbia in February 2025 over USAID funding, during which police entered several civil society organizations, including CRTA. Nedeljkov noted that the Serbian state itself was among the largest recipients of USAID funding, an issue he said was largely absent from the government’s criticism of NGOs.
Dragan Popović, director of the Center for Practical Politics, was similarly critical of the parliamentary meeting, describing it as a continuation of what he called the Serbian Progressive Party’s efforts to suppress independent and critical voices.
Popović argued that the ruling party has increasingly targeted areas of society outside direct government control, including civil society, professional media, education and culture.
He said the government frequently relies on individuals presented as independent actors to advance its political campaigns, including prosecutors and self-described investigators.
The latest initiative has prompted speculation over whether the government could eventually introduce legislation modeled on Russia’s restrictive regulations on foreign-funded organizations.
Popović said he did not expect an immediate formal legislative crackdown, partly because such a move could damage the government’s efforts to maintain its image as a democratic administration in relations with the European Union and Western governments.
However, he warned that formal legislation may not be necessary for the authorities to exert pressure on civil society.
“The regime does not need a law to carry out repression, suppress free speech, undermine civil society or arrest people,” Popović said.
The dispute comes amid growing political tensions in Serbia, where the government of President Aleksandar Vučić has faced sustained criticism from opposition groups, student activists, independent media and civil society organizations.
Critics say the increasingly frequent references to foreign-funded NGOs, “color revolutions” and alleged foreign interference risk creating an atmosphere in which legitimate civil society activity is portrayed as a threat to national security.
