Serbia’s snap election: Can Vucic outmanoeuvre the student revolt?

Weeks of student-led demonstrations have pushed Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic to call an early parliamentary vote, responding to long-standing demands for new elections following the November 2024 Novi Sad railway station canopy collapse that killed 16 people. At their peak, the protests drew more than 100,000 participants in March 2025 and evolved into a national movement focused on accountability, transparency and an end to alleged government negligence. Analysts and civic groups interpret the snap election as a strategic effort by Vucic and the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) to limit political risk. Viktor Stamenkovic of Belgrade’s Institute for Political Studies said the ruling camp is choosing an electoral timetable it considers less hazardous, noting that Vucic’s presidential term ends before the current parliamentary mandate and that transferring his personal political weight into a parliamentary contest is central to his calculations. Critics fear the contest will not address deeper fractures in Serbia’s political life. Investigative reporter Milica Vojinovic and election monitors have pointed to past irregularities, including documented vote buying, and warned of a potential escalation of tactics if the student movement threatens the SNS’s hold on power. Human rights groups and observers have also flagged criminal cases and the possibility of more repressive measures against government critics. The student movement has moved from mass rallies into formal electoral politics, submitting an election list to state authorities after a celebratory march in Belgrade. The Serbia-based Center for Research, Transparency and Accountability (CRTA) says polls indicate students could win parliamentary seats, which the group views as a boost to the representative legitimacy of the legislature. Still, analysts caution that even an SNS victory may not restore broad public confidence: polling shows a majority of citizens believe the country is headed in the wrong direction and want change, leaving post-election governance and legitimacy in question.