Political parties that backed Serbia’s Student List in the October 25 elections are facing an uncertain future, having stepped aside from the electoral race to support the student movement’s successful challenge to the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS). However, political analysts argue that these parties retain considerable room to manoeuvre despite their absence from the new parliament.
In an analysis published by Radar, journalist Stefan Slavković examines the position of opposition parties that supported candidates proposed by the student movement, as well as the challenges they face following the election results.
Among the parties and movements that backed the Student List were the Democratic Party (DS), Green-Left Front (ZLF), Kreni-Promeni, the Movement of Free Citizens (PSG), Ecological Uprising, New Face of Serbia (NLS), the People’s Movement of Serbia (NPS), the League of Social Democrats of Vojvodina and the Roma Party.
Meanwhile, the Party of Freedom and Justice (SSP), Serbia Centre (SRCE) and the Solidarity movement contested the elections together under the European Serbia list, while the former NADA coalition ran as Authentic Right.
The parties that contested the elections independently suffered a major defeat, with their results contributing to internal disputes, membership losses and leadership changes.
The European Serbia and Authentic Right lists together received approximately 50,000 votes, representing around 1.2 per cent of the total. According to the analysis, had the parties supporting the Student List contested independently and collectively secured three per cent of the vote, they could have won between seven and nine parliamentary seats.
However, the Student List’s victory produced an absolute majority in the future National Assembly, simplifying the post-election political landscape. According to preliminary results from the Republic Electoral Commission, the Student List is expected to secure 140 seats, compared with 103 for the SNS, while the remaining seats will go to several minority lists.
Political scientist Ognjen Gogić argues that the election results represent a temporary interruption in the dominance of traditional party politics and a potential restoration of representative democracy.
He maintains that the emergence of the Student List was not the cause of Serbia’s party-system crisis, but rather a consequence of it, as existing political parties had increasingly failed to fulfil their basic democratic function of representing citizens’ political will.
Gogić also rejects the idea that the next Serbian government will be technocratic, arguing that its future ministers will ultimately be chosen through the electoral mandate granted by citizens.
Opposition’s contribution to political change
Dragan Popović, director of the Centre for Practical Politics, says the students’ victory should not be viewed in isolation from the years of opposition activity that preceded it.
He argues that opposition politicians and activists helped preserve Serbia’s institutions through their work in the National Assembly and local councils across the country.
According to Popović, although the student movement brought a new level of creativity and political organisation to the struggle against President Aleksandar Vučić, the opposition had played an important role in maintaining institutional mechanisms that could now facilitate political change.
The political price of supporting the Student List
The parties that backed the Student List now face a difficult position. Although they did not secure parliamentary representation, their decision to support the student movement is widely viewed as a strategic contribution to its victory.
By stepping aside, these parties also gave up potential parliamentary seats and the financial resources associated with parliamentary representation. Nevertheless, their membership has not experienced the same level of fragmentation seen in parties that contested the elections and suffered heavy defeats.
Popović rejects the suggestion that these organisations are destined to remain politically marginalised.
He believes their future will depend on their ideological profiles, political priorities and ability to position themselves in a changing political environment.
According to his assessment, the Green-Left Front could attract left-wing voters, the Movement of Free Citizens could appeal to liberal voters, while the People’s Movement of Serbia could represent the centre-right. Kreni-Promeni and Ecological Uprising could remain relevant among activists focused on local and environmental issues, while the Democratic Party retains the significance of its established opposition tradition.
Gogić also expects ideological and organisational differentiation to emerge within the Student List over time, potentially creating opportunities for some of the parties that supported it to become allies of the new authorities.
The student movement and citizens’ assemblies have also helped establish a broad, non-partisan activist network across Serbia, which could become particularly important during future local elections.
The analysis concludes that, although the parties supporting the Student List sacrificed immediate parliamentary representation, their political future remains open and will depend on how effectively they adapt to the country’s changing political landscape.
