“We are sliding into the darkest of dictatorships”: N1 interviewees on Foreign Agents Law
State institutions - which currently protect government interests rather than national ones - would likely label any activism or legitimate public discontent as foreign interference if the proposed Foreign Agents Law is adopted, said N1 interviewees. They warn that this would bring the country a step closer to “the darkest of dictatorships.”
Members of Serbia’s ruling Socialist Movement, founded by Serbian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandar Vulin, have submitted to the Parliament a draft law on the Register of Foreign Agents.
Former Director of the Military Intelligence Agency General Momir Stojanovic explains that this initiative aims to discredit frequent protests and growing public discontent by portraying them as the work of foreign agents.
“I personally think the law won’t be passed, as it would undermine the government’s legitimacy and reinforce suspicions of its autocratic nature,” Stojanovic said, adding that such legislation is difficult to imagine in a democratic society.
“No one disputes a democratic society’s right to shape its future free from foreign interference. However, this law’s true purpose is to suppress and stifle legitimate citizens’ protests by arresting their leaders and linking activists to foreign powers. The goal is to portray these demonstrations as violent attempts to overthrow a democratically elected government, rather than acknowledge them as genuine expressions of public discontent,” he said.
Stojanovic believes the law has been introduced to divert attention from the Novi Sad tragedy, adding that its passage would expose the true nature of the incumbent government.
“Implementing such legislation is characteristic of undemocratic, autocratic regimes. It would signal a shift toward heightened repression against citizens exercising their right to protest, likely triggering an even stronger public response against such authoritarian governance,” he emphasizes.
He expresses concern that a law banning the NGO sector in Serbia could be the next proposal.
“We would be entering a sequence of repressive, autocratic measures that would create complete chaos in our society,” he warns.
Journalist Branko Cecen notes that the adoption of such a law is indeed possible, pointing out how the Security Intelligence Agency (BIA)) has already begun arresting people and detaining them in unmarked vans, reminiscent of authoritarian regimes.
“We are gradually sliding into the darkest of dictatorships,” he says. “We are witnessing direct violations of the law by police, secret police, prosecutors, and courts... We stand just one step away from it,” he adds.
Cecen believes this law is part of an ongoing campaign to demonize civil society, particularly organizations working on human rights, groups that typically pose challenges to undemocratic regimes. He draws parallels with Russia’s similar legislation, which initially targeted civil society and organizations focusing on culture and prison torture.
In 2022, Russia’s law also targeted independent media, and Cecen anticipates a similar progression in Serbia.
“Within the first few months, over a hundred independent media outlets were shut down in Russia. In the next phase, the government gained authority to designate individuals as foreign agents without evidence or explanation. Appeals are permitted, but none have ever succeeded,” Cecen explains.
While proponents argue the law follows an American rather than Russian model, Cecen clarifies the fundamental differences.
He says the American law, enacted in 1938 in response to Nazi propaganda, primarily regulated foreign lobbyists and political consultants. Crucially, US law requires proof that actions are illegal, financially supported by foreign entities, and demonstrably harmful, explains Cecen.
The Serbian proposal, he said, is more akin to stigmatizing individuals, comparing it to the yellow stars forced upon Jews in 1941.
“Just because someone applies for and receives donations from abroad does not mean they are doing something harmful. You have to prove they are doing something harmful, not just say ‘you’re receiving money,’” the journalist said.
Cecen points out that the Serbian Constitution guarantees rights to criticize government, institutions, and to protest, those conducting arrests in unmarked vans are actually the ones violating the Constitution and acting against national interests.
Regarding whether media outlets like Russia Today or Sputnik should be designated as foreign agents under this law, Cecen argues that designation should be based on actions rather than funding sources.
“Serbian ministries receive donations from the US, the European Union, and others without scrutiny. Should we apply the same labels to them?” he asks rhetorically.
Stojanovic adds that while unofficial targeting of independent media, civil society, and NGOs has been ongoing in Serbia for years, it has not been formally codified.
“To prove an organization or individual is acting unconstitutionally and connected to foreign power centers, you must establish their objectives, connections, financial sources, and the ultimate goals of their alleged foreign sponsors. Who would conduct this investigation? In our country, it would be completely politicized institutions,” he explains.
The assessment of whether protesters are linked to foreign powers would fall to the BIA, Internal Affairs Ministry, and judiciary, Stojanovic notes.
“The danger lies in entrusting this evaluation to institutions politically controlled by this government, which instead of protecting national interests and democracy, protect the ruling political option. Vulin knows very well that these institutions would link any activism, any justified dissatisfaction, or any protest and its leaders to foreign interference,” he explains.
Looking at international precedents, Hungary, an EU member, has implemented such a law, while in Georgia, public protests successfully prevented its adoption, Cecen notes.
“In Georgia, 250,000 protesters maintained demonstrations for ten days until the government withdrew the proposal. Similar action is needed here. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has deemed Russia’s version of the law a threat to basic human rights and inherently authoritarian. At the same time, the EU has launched a full-scale effort against the Hungarian law, which is still ongoing,” said Cecen.
Koje je vaše mišljenje o ovoj temi?
Pridružite se diskusiji ili pročitajte komentare