European MovementSerbia

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN SERBIA, JUNE 2004.

REPORT ON NGO GOTV CAMPAIGN

Introduction

This publication is a detailed description of the GOTV campaign of Serbian NGO for Presidential elections in June 2004. It demonstrates the power and efficiency of NGO cooperation and coordination supported by deep involvement and understanding of donors. It also shows how much more can be achieved when activities are based on expertise and concentration on a common goal and not on self or organizational promotion.

It contains a Summary of the campaign and detailed information about the activities of each of the participant organization of this GOTV coalition.

A series of six analytical communication papers is included as it was part of our advocacy effort aimed at international community.

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN SERBIA, JUNE 2004.

REPORT ON NGO GOTV CAMPAIGN

DEMOCRATIC OPTION FROM YEAR 2000 RECONFIRMED

Mr. Boris Tadic, candidate of Democratic Party won the Presidential elections 2004, in Serbia, against Tomislav Nikolic, candidate of the Radical Party. This happened a year after the assassination of Prime Minister Djindjic, when many expressed serious concern for the way Serbia was going.

Citizens in Serbia voted in majority for a program focused on peace, tolerance, reforms and above all European values and European integration of Serbia and Montenegro. The turnout was 48.29 % of electoral body, with undisputable difference of 245,036 votes in favor of Tadic. One must point out that the number of votes for Mr. Tadic doubled between two rounds. Having to choose between democracy and nationalistic populism, Serbian citizens opted for European future and not retrograde nationalistic propaganda.

NGO CONTRIBUTION

The contribution of NGOs in the elections in 2000 was recognized as crucial for motivation and high participation of citizens for democratic change. This year, NGOs developed several GOTV campaigns and achieved a comparable result. First analysis shows the evident impact of GOTV campaign on elections results. The best evaluation of our efforts could be shown in figures: Serbia has 8,600 election sites. In our campaign we targeted around 1,500 election sites. The difference between Nikolic's and Tadic's final results was around 245,000 votes in favor of Tadic. On more than 1,500 sites that we targeted with our campaign the difference was 270,000 in favor of Tadic!

The common point of different campaigns was very precise targeting (to a voting post with specific addresses) based on CESIDs databases and analysis. Results of the GOTV campaign are obvious. For the first time after year 2000, in a number of towns and municipalities in province, citizens were motivated to express their democratic option again (examples with the turnout above 50%). Consequently, the democratic option prevailed in several cities where Radicals traditionally have had majority in previous elections.

CESID (Center for free elections and democracy) had 300.000 letters sent and a TV clip promoting elections as such. It was followed by a door-to-door campaign. In the night after elections CESID was the first to come with result estimations that proved to be absolutely precise.

Civic Initiatives and FENS (Federation of NGOs of Serbia) distributed almost a million leaflets and posters in 85 municipalities targeted by CESID. They were put in mailboxes or given directly to people by more than 600 young activists of local NGOs. The day before the electoral silence we published an add signed by 260 NGOs and one of the leaflets as supplements in two dailies, also with very good reactions. The annual Conference of CI and FENS was held in Belgrade on June 19/20 and gathered 260 organizations. A strong political statement was published supporting democratic candidate that respects values of civil society. Three declarations were adopted about European integration, Poverty reduction and Youth Participation.

European Movement in Serbia (EMinS) organized public events dedicated especially to indecisive young people, potential pro-European and democratic voters in Serbia. The message “VOTE FOR EUROPE” was printed on the posters, leaflets, balloons and T-shirts our volunteers wore during the public campaigns. In 30 Local Councils all over Serbia and in Belgrade (31 total) central events were organized in the town centers and most frequent boulevards gathering places of the citizens. The campaign included positioning of the posters “Vote for Europe” with information about central event timing and distribution of the material leaflets with message of the youth to the future president of Serbia, popular balloons and European flags. Appropriate cultural/music events were prepared. At the same time concerts of local popular groups, rock bands, classical music orchestra and DJs were bringing the positive spirit and aimed at motivating young people to actively engage in their future designing.

The GOTV campaigns received substantial coverage at local media as well as at the national level. NGOs leadership took part in the media campaign (talk shows, interviews, articles, reviews).

Center for Modern Skills also had a campaign “Where are you going out on Sunday? To elections!” which included leaflets and a TV commercial. Creative Youth of Novi Sad and

the women's NGO Voice of Difference and Women in Black also had their targeted campaigns.

A positive approach and optimistic messages were the tone of all NGOs communication with the citizens. Presence of NGOs has again become visible and their involvement is an encouraging sign of permanent interest for election and democracy issues.

LESSONS LEARNED

- Important and measurable results can be achieved in GOTV campaigns if they are based on a serious statistical research and analysis of previous election results. It proved that general campaigns, which are not properly targeted, are no more acceptable.- Important and measurable results can be achieved only if the campaign is run by a coalition of NGOs with precisely defined roles. In our case CESID was responsible for targeting, Civic Initiatives (using resources of Federation of NGOs of Serbia) and European Movement in Serbia with its branch offices were the “working bees” responsible for creating materials and actions and distributing materials- As a result of previous conditions important and measurable results can be achieved with relatively modest but efficiently planed and spent budget. Compared with approximately 2 million dollars spent on GOTV campaign in year 2000, support of foreign donors in year 2004 was much lower, around 300.000US$. But efficiency and visibility of NGO campaigns in 2004 were not inferior.- Even the smallest budget depends on donors that have deep understanding of local situation and its regional implications. It also depends on trust in local resources and partners. This trust inevitably results in quick action and flexible approach.- Such trust based efficient partnerships can be built only on a long-term commitment to common values and goals. It is not a mere coincidence that the same donors, primarily German Marshal Fund and Freedom House supported the year 2000 campaign that overthrew Milosevic and this year presidential campaign. The NDI has long-term cooperation with CESID. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund, that defined Serbia as its pivotal point in Europe, joined this year by supporting Federation of NGOs of Serbia (FENS) conference, held between two rounds of presidential campaign. Canadian Urgent Action Fund supported women's campaign.- Foundations' and Funds' decisions depend on people like Craig Kennedy and Pavol Demes from GMF, Stephen Heintz and Bill Moody from RBF and Mike Staresinic from FH. All of them have been participating for years in the Serbian drama, always inspiring us by an objective point of view, by ideas and solutions that we “in the boiling pot” cannot see being directly involved. - We consider our success as a result of common endeavor of a coalition of local NGOs supported by old friends. We would especially like to stress a continuous support and advice of Pavol Demes, whose invaluable experience proved to be a common asset of the whole region of the EU future members and new neighbors.

FOLLOW UP

Te most recent experiences of NGOs, media networking and activism as well as the fine-tuning of main political, social, economic and broader interactive messages will be used in the local elections in September, as the main follow up of the presidential elections in June. All NGOs are highly concerned about the possible outcome of the local elections. These are seen to depend on the results of the presidential elections and will be conditioned by evident deficits of the democratic and administrative capacity at the local level, where a strong partisan logic should be exposed to the competition of a new concept of coalition building at the local level corresponding to the national consensus building at the state level.

At the local level there are numerous potential sources of tensions political, social and ethnic with uneven geographical distribution. That is why it is necessary to encourage civil society in Serbia to play a role in local elections in September 2004, and contribute to consolidation of democratic forces. Local elections will become the crucial issue in the political life of Serbia, with a potential to further strengthen results of the presidential elections.

CONCLUSION

The of election results show that in the places that were targeted the best ever results for democratic candidate were achieved. We all learned quite a lot on how not to waste human and financial resources on “general campaigns” as well as the benefits of cooperation.

This campaign was very important for the NGOs in Serbia. The election of Mr. Tadic opens new perspective for the whole sector. The campaign was a revival of old energy, commitment and solidarity in the sector, reactivating those that after the year 2000 were at the verge of giving up. Success was something the sector needed and successful we were.

Prepared by Jelica Minic & Miljenko Dereta

GOTV CAMPAIGN OF CIVIC INITIATIVES

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN SERBIA, JUNE 2004.

As in every elections in Serbia Civic Initiatives (CI) took an active part in Get Out To Vote Campaign insisting on a necessity for NGOs to be publicly involved in elections as a basic democratic process. For this Presidential elections we developed a strategy that would on one hand reinforce and support CESIDs campaign but also that would give FENS an opportunity to clearly formulate its position on values that we consider to be the basis of a long term sustainable democratization process in Serbia.

On several preparatory meeting CI, CESID and EMINS agreed on the goals of the campaign, nature of messages, target groups and areas and ways of distribution of materials. Roles of each organisation were precisely defined and timetables coordinated. Civic Initiatives accepted responsabilities in the campaign that will not be attractive by variety of activities but will achieve its goals by impressive numbers and will proove our organizational capacity and experience.

Believing that people targeted by CESID should be approached more than once, Civic Initiatives, in cooperation with organizations from FENS (Federation of NGOs of Serbia), printed and distributed carefuly formulated and designed materials. Messages were different for each round of elections. A positive approach and optimistic visions were the tone of communication with the citizens.

The annual conference of FENS was scheduled to the weekend between two rounds of elections to be a Forum on future of Serbia as seen by NGOs. We wanted to have an opportunity to clearly express the set of values that we consider to be the base of a long term sustainable democratic change of Serbia.

First roundCI and FENS designed, printed and distributed around half a million leaflets in 60 municipalities targeted by CESID. These leaflets invited citizens to Get Out And Vote and insisted on a choice between pro European politics and isolationist policy. They were put in mail boxes or given directly to people by more than 800 young activists of local NGOs

and CI and EMINS volunteer. Materials were sent throughout Serbia by regular bus lines, a method we developed in previous campaigns. It is the fastest, cheapest and most secure way having in mind poor transport infrastructure in Serbia.

The day before the electoral silence we published one of the leaflets as adds in two daily newspapers the Blic and the Danas also with very good reactions from the public. The reaction of people was very good and they praised the balanced «choice of words» that made them think about their role in elections and their responsibility as citizens. They also appreciated the humor in the leaflet LANE MOJE. “Opening leaflet” in which all bold words are variations of word LIFE in Serbian.Front page: We have one life. We decide on our own how we are going to live it. Back page: We decide by giving our vote. One but worthy!

Respected citizensWe know how life is difficult for all of usOur primary concern is how to survive a day, a week, a monthWe know how tired you are of the avalanches of words and promises; we know you have lost faith in most of politicians who asked you to vote for them.You are wondering: What do I get out of life?You answer to yourself: No one listens to my voice, no one sees my anguish, I merely survive…The only way to revive the hope for a better tomorrow, for yourself and your childrenis to take your life in your own hands.The first step is not to allow the others to choose instead of you thosewho decide for all of us.Move on, start living, be disappointed and angry butget out and vote!Contribute by electing accountable, brave politicians who have initiative, ready to make agreements and take risks.Competent to speak a language which Europe understands and tounderstand the language the world speaks to us.We have one life. We decide on our own how we are going to live it.We decide by our vote. One but worthy!

Between two rounds.The biggest event for NGOs was a two days conference “New Beginning” of FENS and Civic Initiatives. 256 organizations from all Serbia sent their representatives. A great satisfaction was expressed with the contribution of NGOs to voters turn out in the first round of elections. Some participants said it revived their activism and feeling of being part of large group with a common goal: democratic Serbia. «A new solidarity brought us together again said one of the participants.

The main discussion on the Conference was on three declarations: Declaration on Poverty reduction and role of NGOs, Declaration on youth participation (drafted by Students Unions) and Declaration on European integrations (Drafted by European Movement in Serbia). All three documents were thoroughly analyzed as priorities for the sector.

The challenges of current political events were present in all discussions. A need for more pressure on Government for finally changing the NGO law and defining financial frame for the sector were set as priority activity of FENS. Creating a body for institutional relations between NGOs and State and a necessity of a Strategy for development of third sector were also enhanced.

Mr. Pavol Demes, Director for Central and Eastern Europe of the German Marshall Fund, gave an inspiring speech on importance of election participation sharing good and bad experiences from Slovakia. As part of possibilities and support available in the future, the European Agency for Reconstruction and Balkan Trust for Democracy announced their new programs.At the request of participants we invited both presidential candidates to come to the conference and present their policies towards NGOs and citizen participation and to answer to some questions from participants.

Tomislav Nikolic refused to come and talk to NGOs. Boris Tadic accepted the invitation and spent one hour answering the questions. He stressed the need for continuous contacts with citizens, for necessity of NGO contribution to many areas where the state has no capacity and for his readiness to consult with NGOs and consider their projects for joint actions. All electronic media reported on his meeting with NGOs.

Sample leaflet (back side in cyrilic) TEXT: YOU WANT SERBIA IN EUROPE? VOTE

LANE MOJE(Lane moje means "my lamb" and is the name of the most popular song in Serbia that recently won second place in Eurovision song contest. Apart from being a good combination of words we wanted to make people understand that Europe is entertainment, normal life and competitions that we can participate in with success.

L NEA

MOJEL NA E MOJE

projects for joint actions. All electronic media reported on his meeting with NGOs.As an independent impression of a guest to the Conference we attach the text by Chuck Hirt from CEE Citizens Network.

Reflections from a guest at the FENS conference, 19-20, June 2004

The annual meeting of FENS was the a most impressive event. The size of the delegation with over 250 participants was remarkable for itself and an indication of the interest in the NGO community to work together. The second striking thing upon entering the group was the diversity. This was noticable in many respects, but particularly the participation of disabled and of youth.

It was most impressive that they have been able to form such large organization and that it operates in line with its values of reflecting the differences in the country. They “walk the talk”. It is important for the future of Serbia that such groups already exist and operate effectively.Their time together was not focused on the needs of the NGO sector but primarily on several important issues affecting the civil society in Serbia. They developed resolutions related to Poverty Reduction, Citizen Participation (especially youth) and on EU integration. Often when NGO leaders come together they are not as well focused. The inclusion of presentations on access to information and how technology can support their work were also impressive.

Chuck HirtCEE Citizens Network

List of municipalities and organisations FIRSTROUND

SECOND ROUND

BOTHROUNDS

Ada Volonteri Gi sa voza~ima

AleksinacTalas

BorUdru`enja gra|ana Life

^a~akGra|anski parlament

JagodinaAlternativni parlament gra|ana

Kraljevo Oko

Kru{evacEdukativni centar

Ni{Otvoreni klub

Pan~evoNIP Pan~evac

Po`egaUdru`enje gra|ana Sretenje

LazarevacCentar modernih ve{tina Volonteri Gi

Kragujevac NadaRomski informativni centar

SuboticaAsocijacija manjinskih NVO

U`iceHumanitarno udru`enje Ard

ValjevoTim Valjevo

Zaje`arDobro drvo (Ivan i Milo{)

ZvezdaraVolonteri Gi

ZemunVolonteri Gi

Be~ejVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

^okaVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

Kanji`aVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

Novi Be~ejVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

SentaVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

ApatinVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

Ba~ka TopolaVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

Ba~ki PetrovacVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

Sremska MitrovicaGrupa 022

Stari GradVolonteri Gi

TopolaTim

TutinImpuls

Velika Plana@ene u akciji

VlasotincePredrag @ivkovi}

Vo`dovacVolonteri Gi

Vr{acUrbana radionica Vr{ac

ZrenjaninZrenjaninski edukativni centar

Vra~arVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

Bela CrkvaPokret za Belu Crkvu, Pshycho invest

^ukaricaVolonteri Gi

DimitrovgradKIC Caribrod

IvanjicaMea Urba

Malo Crni}eAlka iz Po`arevca

Novi BeogradVolonteri Gi

PalilulaVolonteri Gi

RakovicaVolonteri Gi

Savski venacVolonteri Gi

SmederevoHumanitarna grupa Hera

Smed.PalankaHumanitarna grupa Hera

Stari GradVolonteri Gi

SvrljigOtvoreni klub iz Ni{a

Vo`dovacVolonteri Gi

Vra~arVolonteri Gi

BrusCentar za mlade

]uprijaKonstruktivni civilni anga`man iz Para}ina

GrockuCentar modernih ve{tina

KikindaDistrikt 0230

Knja`evacTimo~ki kub

KovinFocid

LeskovacResus centar Leskovac

LoznicaOsvit iz Šabca

MajdanpekEvropski pokret

MladenovacCentar modernih veština

Ni{ka BanjaOtvoreni klub Ni{ (volonteri)

Novi Pazar Urban In

Novi SadForum vojvo|anskih NVO

PalilulaVolonteri Gi

Para}inKonstruktivni civilni anga`man

PirotUdru`enje prosvetnih radnika Logos

Pre~evoCentar za multikulturno obrazovanje

PrijepoljeNova vizija

ProkupljeTopli~ka inicijativa

[abacOsvit

Savski venacVolonteri Gi

SjenicaFlores

SopotCentar modernih ve{tina

Mali IdošVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

SomborVolonteri Gi sa voza~ima

NegotinEvropski pokret iz Majdanpeka

their bad results.RESULTSFirst analysis of the results shows the evident impact of the GOTV campaign on the elections' results. The best evaluation of our efforts could be shown in figures: Serbia has 8,600 election sites. In our campaign we targeted around 1,500 election sites. The difference between Nikolic's and Tadic's final results was around 245,000 votes in favor of Tadic. On more than 1,500 sites that we targeted with our campaign the difference was 270,000 in favor of Tadic!According to Zoran Lucic from CESID: “… in case the increase of the number of voters who voted for Tadic had not happened in the second round, on the selected election sites, Nikolic would have won the elections… on approximately 7,000 election sites that were not selected for GOTV campaign, Nikolic won 25,199 votes more than Tadic did, and he did not win the elections because Tadic had an unbeatable advantage on the selected election sites”.CI are very satisfied with our contribution to the turn out of voters as it directly determined the results of the elections. It also strengtened our network and encoureged young volunteers for more direct action and more intense participation.

VOTE FOR EUROPE

European MovementSerbia

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN SERBIA, JUNE 2004.

GOTV Campaign - European Movement in Serbia

“VOTE FOR EUROPE”Draft report

In accordance with its mission European Movement in Serbia strives for the establishment of stable democratic institutions and thus, for conduct of free and democratic elections in Serbia. Having in mind that Serbia is in deep institutional and political crisis which is characterized by unfavourable overall political situation, citizens' dissatisfaction, and lack of clear vision of global development, EMinS engaged in pro electoral Get out to vote campaign named “Vote for Europe”. The campaign activities were coordinated with other NGOs in Serbia.

For the first round of presidential elections' GOTV campaign European Movement in Serbia organized public events dedicated especially to indecisive young people, potential pro-European and democratic voters in Serbia. The message “VOTE FOR EUROPE” was printed on the posters, leaflets, balloons and T-shirts our volunteers wore during the public campaigns. In 30 Local Councils all over Serbia (Bajina Ba{ta, Bor, ^a~ak, ^ukarica, Jagodina, Kikinda, Kragujevac, Kraljevo, Kru{evac, Lazarevac, Leskovac, Majdanpek, Ni{, Novi Pazar, Novi Sad, Pan~evo, Para}in, Pirot, Po`arevac, Po`ega, Sombor, Sremska Mitrovica, Subotica, U`ice, Valjevo, Velika Plana, Vrbas, Vr{ac, Zaje~ar, Zrenjanin) and in Belgrade (31 total) central events were organized in the town centres and most frequent boulevards gathering places of the citizens.

The campaign incorporated standard actions: positioning of the posters “Vote for Europe” with information about central event timing and distribution of the material leaflets with message of the youth to the future president of Serbia, popular balloons and European flags.

Appropriate cultural/music events were prepared. At the same time concerts of local popular groups, rock bands, classical music orchestra and DJs were bringing the positive spirit and aimed at motivating young people to actively engage in their future designing. Most of the activities took place from 9th until 12th of June. All of the activities received substantial media coverage in local newspapers and TV stations. In the second round of presidential elections EMinS continued with a strong GOTV campaign under slogan: “Vote for Europe” in Belgrade and throughout Serbia by organizing public events regarding the accession of Serbia to the EU. EMinS again made public call through press releases and public appearances in media directed towards the youngest voters to use their right to vote and determine their European future by their own will, not leaving this decision in the hands of others. Radio and TV clips were distributed to EMinS Local Councils and broadcasted at local radio and TV stations.

Throughout pro-electoral campaign the variety of cultural and musical events in different towns all over Serbia were combined with pro-electoral messages of EMinS and included, apart from standard, several original activities.

In ^a~ak rock concert of the group “Behind the door” comprised of local students which was at the same time their first public appearance and accompanied with strong media coverage caused enormous interest of the Cacak youth. Very positive and affirmative newspaper and TV reports contributed to the success of campaign.

In Ni{ a manifestation was organized at the town square forming of small debate circles and discussing with the citizens, especially young students of Nis about the importance of European integration. At the same time on two selected city spots concert of classical music has been organized and, performed by Music School students, which was peculiar “happening” in Nis and provoked open sympathies of the citizens.

Lazarevac it is estimated that 1000 citizens visited Local Council activity in this town and for the first time majority of votes went to democratic candidate.

In Leskovac on 4th of June round table “European perspective of Serbia upturns and downfalls” was held with guest speaker professor Latinka Perovic.Special attention was paid to actual political situation and possibilities for its circumventing. It gained significant media attention.

Novi Pazar - the campaign which was at the same time pro-electoral and pro-European was the first event of its kind ever to be organized in multiethnic community like Novi Pazar and some smaller surrounding municipalities and was no doubt welcomed and successful it was accompanied by press release and popular music was played which attracted large number of young and curious citizens. Media coverage and news report at local TV Jedinstvo was edited in the evening hours and covered territory of several municipalities: Novi Pazar, Raska, Leposavic, Tutin, Rozaje, Sjenica, Nova Varos i Prijepolje.

Valjevo - In Valjevo EMinS Local Councils organized on June 23rd panel discussion “Serbian and European Consciousness” where professor Radovan Marjanovic spoke to all political parties' young representatives as well as all other interested citizens. The discussion got significant media coverage and initiated debate that lasted for several hours.

In Zrenjanin the campaign incorporated concerted action of EMinS Local Council, CESID activists and Zrenjanin educational center and was expanded to the surrounding villages. 52% of voters turn out in the first round for the first time after 2000 show the success of such campaign. In the second round Zrenjanin Local Council organized duel between local representatives of Democratic Party and Radical Party in Zrenjanin. The debate was named “The EU and the Process of European Integration of Serbia”. In rather tolerant atmosphere representatives of two totally opposite political options discussed the issue and expressed their opinion on EU and especially its policy towards Serbia but different approaches strikingly dominated the discussion. EMinS representatives moderated the discussion.

In Bor turn out in the first round was little under 50% and democratic trend was obvious when compared to previous electoral results. Face to face campaign and direct communication with the citizens while distributing EMinS material was conducted in Vrbas as well as subtle approach to young people in cafes.

Local DJs performance with appropriate loudspeakers was organized in Jagodina and Sremska Mitrovica while EMinS volunteers distributed the material and local TV stations followed the activity discussing the purpose of the action with EMinS LCs' presidents in respective towns.

Presidents of Local Councils in Pozarevac, Novi Sad etc. gave interviews to local stations and stressed the importance of national consensus regarding European integration as well as necessity of democratic president in this context.

In Belgrade more then 20 volunteers were involved in street event. Special stand was built in well known pedestrian- Knez Mihajlova Street. The stand was branded with logo of European Movement in Serbia and logo of GOTV campaign. Volunteers were giving materials to citizens. Event was announced in media and DJ Nikola, famous among youth, was in charge for music. Also, special mobile team “young Europeans on rollers” were giving leaflets in wider area. The event was very interesting for media - more then 15 journalists, including TV crews and news agencies, were there making reports and taking interviews from representatives of EMinS (Danijel Pantic and Vojislav Milosevic). In tomorrows newspaper photos from event and reportages were printed on two front pages of high rated

EMinS Material distribution “Vote for Europe”

newspapers (see press clipping).

Even though it was severely criticized by the Radical Party as an anti-Radical campaign it only invited citizens to vote for the democratic and European candidate. The citizens responded positively to the EMinS messages and were very supportive for the idea of “European president” promoted by EMinS, especially evaluating its preferred characteristics of uncorrupted and democratic. EMinS campaign in 31 towns received substantial coverage at local media as well as at the national level. Leadership of the EMinS took part in the media campaign (talk shows, interviews, articles, reviews).

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN SERBIA, JUNE 2004.

CeSID has approached the design of campaign strategy, messages and vehicles starting from following presumptions:-Institution of the President of the Republic of Serbia, the importance of elections, as well as the importance, the power and the weight of the right to vote have been devalued as a consequence of three election cycles failed during 2002-2003.-The threshold in terms of the turnout (50% of the constituency) was abolished. However, it appeared that the population was not entirely aware of the fact that the President would have been elected no matter how low or high the turnout is.-Candidates often send different conflicting and/or complex messages. This could have potentially enhanced confusion and consequently further demotivated voting.

Campaign Goal

The goal of the campaign was to motivate higher turnout in areas with high potential support for parties of the democratic bloc. The appearance of the campaign, however, did not differ depending on the location of the campaign implementation. The message has appeared impartial and non-partisan, no matter the vehicle or the area of implementation.

The campaign has been implemented according to a specific strategy. CeSID has used the information from database on election results in order to divide a total number of polling stations in Serbia in 4 strata, according to following criteria:

1. Democratic votes low turnout2. Democratic votes solid turnout3. Radical votes solid turnout4. Radical votes low turnout

CeSID's IT team has already been contracted by NDI for the work on developing such database. NDI has expressed its readiness to make an in-kind contribution to CeSID's campaign, by letting CeSID use this database for the purpose of campaign planning. Moreover, CeSID has enhanced the database and adjusted it to specific campaign needs.

Campaign activities have been most intensive and have focused mostly on 1576 polling areas within the first stratum. The intensity of campaign activities was decreased in second and third stratum, while the campaigning in the fourth stratum has been only as visible as necessary to maintain impartial appearance.

Database on Elections

During the period until June 13, when the first election round took place, CeSID has advanced NDI election results database and tailored it to suite the needs of the GOTV campaign. CeSID's IT team has worked in two directions: first of all, the team needed to extract and create database of polling areas with lower turnout but high potential support for parties of the democratic bloc. On the other hand, the team needed to generate up to 300.000 addresses of households within polling areas with lower turnout but high potential support for parties of the democratic bloc. Addresses were used within the direct mail campaign. Before the run-off took place on June 27, the team has further advanced the database, including in the results collected after the first election round. Again, 50.000 addresses were generated and used within the direct mail campaign. Targeting effort also contributed to the success of door-to-door campaigning.

Campaign strategy based on such information has proven to be crucial, as the impact analysis has showed that the difference in votes between two candidates in the second round was built exactly in targeted polling areas.

Target Group

Socio demographic characteristics In its campaign, with the assistance of its database, CeSID has aimed at voters of a democratic orientation, of both genders, between the ages of 18-27 with high school, high and higher education living in urban areas as its primary target group and voters of a democratic orientation, of both genders, between ages of 27-42 with high school, high and higher education living in urban areas as the secondary target group of its campaign.

Socio-psychological characteristics

Relatively educated people, representatives of the impoverished middle class, disappointed in politics and economics situation in the society. On the otherhand, those people are either partly or fully aware of the necessity for implementation of reforms. Moreover, those people have both the awareness of, as well as the commitment to the necessity of building the society that would provide equal opportunities for all its members.

Campaign Design

Campaign vehicles included TV clips, flyers, stickers, posters and direct mail. The campaign had a non-partisan, neutral and very positive appearance. All elements of communication were tested on focus groups, as well as through telephone survey. The production of campaign vehicles began only after the campaign design was adjusted to the results of the testing. CeSID's creative team has designed three TV clips, one sticker, two posters, two flyers and has put together and designed two letters for the direct mail.

Campaign Messages

Leading campaign slogan was: I choose to vote (Ja Biram da Glasam)Support campaign slogans were:

-Democracy is continuously conquered (Demokratija se stalno osvaja) and

-If you do not choose, someone else will (Ako ne biras ti, izabrace drugi)

Campaign Tactics

The campaign has ran in two phases:First PhaseThe first phase of the campaign has begun on May 22 and lasted until June 12. The campaign has been educational, since the citizens have not been sufficiently familiar with the alterations of electoral law and the abolishment of electoral census. The

law and the abolishment of electoral census. The citizens have been introduced to the fact that the President of the Republic of Serbia will be elected irrespective of the fact whether they do or do not turn out in the elections.

Second PhaseThe Second Phase of the campaign has been conducted from June 15 to June 26. CeSID has continued to communicate the fact that there is no electoral census i.e. that one of the two candidates will be elected the President of the Republic of Serbia for a term of five years irrespective of the citizens' turnout in the elections.

Campaign ActivitiesDirect Mail

Direct mail letters, in circulation of 300.000 before the first and 50.000 between two election rounds, were produced and sent to home addresses of families within targeted polling areas.Direct mail letters were addressed to particular families. By addressing direct mail to 350.000 families, CeSID has actually targeted approximately 1.000.000 voters. Names and addresses of families within targeted areas were provided by CeSID's IT team.Both direct mail letters have addressed issues such as the abolishment of turnout threshold of 50%, importance of elections, as well as the power and the importance of each vote.A team of 20 CeSID's activists was engaged in preparing letters for sending both before the first and the second election round. NDI provided logistic support for this activity.

Door-to-Door Campaign

Between two election rounds, during June 19-25, CeSID has launched a door-to-door campaign. CeSID has developed dialog lines for this campaign which was carried out in Belgrade, Nis, Novi Sad, Subotica and Novi Pazar. This campaign component engaged 500 CeSID's activists: 350 activists in Belgrade and 50 in Nis, 50 in Novi Sad, 26 in Subotica and 24 in Novi Pazar.According to the initial plan, the teams were to visit 17.000 households. However, their performance exceeded by far the initial plan, as only in Belgrade municipalities, the teams have managed to visit 25.000 households and therefore to target 75.000 voters.

Activists that took part in door-to-door campaign were trained by NDI trainers.

Door-to-door teams have carried flyers as vehicles for this campaign component. Campaign vehicles that were deployed in minority areas have been designed in appropriate minority language.As dialog lines were designed in a form of a questionnaire, each team carried canvas returns that were completed for each visited household and used for further analysis.Media Campaign

TV clips were broadcasted on two national TV stations (TV B 92 and BK TV) and 48 local TV stations. National and local TV stations were selected according to their ratings, area of origin, as well as with regard to the consumers' profile and its compliance with the campaign target groups. Broadcasts on national TV stations, being of a low intensity, served as a cover for the targeting operation.

Newspaper adds were printed in 5 national and 10 local newspapers before both first and second election round. National and local newspapers were selected according to their circulation, area of origin, as well as with regard to the readers' profile and its compliance with the campaign target group.

with the campaign target group.

Printed Material

CeSID has produced a total of 105.000 flyers, 40.000 before the first election round and 65.000 (including flyers in Hungarian language) before the second election round. One portion of leaflets was used in door-to-door campaign that took place between two election rounds.CeSID has also produced a total of 300.000 stickers (100.000 before the first and 200.000 before the second election round) and 10.000 posters (4.000 before the first election round and 6.000 before the second election round). Up to 2.000 CeSID's activists have volunteered to participate in the distribution of campaign material in towns throughout Serbia.

PR/Communication

CeSID organized four press conference and had numerous individual contacts with journalist. Through its communication activities, CeSID continuously elaborated the message of its campaign. Main issues stressed were importance of the position of the president, importance of elections and absence of threshold. CeSID's members have made numerous appearances on both national and local TV stations. During two weeks between two election rounds, CeSID's coordinators have arranged appearances on TV stations in those areas where the analysis has showed a potential for further increase of turnout figures.

Grocka

Mladenovac

Nova Varo{

Novi Be~ej

Opovo

Para}in

Rekovac

Sokobanja

Vrnja~ka Banja

@iti{te

Ivanjica

Kni}

Po`arevac

Smederevska Palanka

Zrenjanin

^oka

Pirot

Po`ega

[abac

Bato~ina

Kosjeri}

Negotin

Smederevo

Sopot

Vladimirci

Apatin

Aran|elovac

Ku~evo

Lazarevac

Topola

Priboj

Svilajnac

Zaje~ar

Trstenik

Ra~a

Vr{ac

Lu~ani

Loznica

Mali I|o{

^ukarica

Sombor

Prijepolje

Ba~ki Petrovac

Ada

Savski Venac

Kova~ica

Kragujevac

Valjevo

Kanji`a

Senta

U`ice

Rakovica

Ba~ka Topola

Kru{evac Zemun

Novi Beograd

Novi Sad

Sjenica

Tutin

Vra~ar

Zvezdara

Be~ej

^a~ak

Stari Grad

Kraljevo

Novi Pazar

Ni{

Pan~evo

Vo`dovac

Palilula

Mladenovac

Subotica

CREATIVE YOUTH OF NOVI SAD

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN SERBIA, JUNE 2004.

Background

The last parliamentary elections have left the national minorities' representatives outside the Parliament. Furthermore, despite the multicultural structure of Serbian population, none of the current candidates for the president is mentioning the ethnic minorities. This paradox is most strongly felt in Vojvodina, which gathers more than 20 nationalities and represents a specific region of European range.

At the same time, Serbia is again threatened by the rise of the Radical Party, led by Vojislav Seselj, who is charged by the Hague Tribunal for crimes against humanity. Their ultra-nationalistic and isolationistic demagogy is now supplemented by a social one. This is swaying a large number of “victims” of economic transition and the population dissatisfied by high levels of corruption and crime in the society. This is the part of population that has short memory, forgetting that it was under the Radical and Socialist parties that those deviations have escalated.

The abovementioned circumstances have resulted in gradual retreat of representatives of national minorities from public life and media are coming close to ignoring them completely.

All these factors have contributed towards the feeling of indifference and political passivity among the young people from national minorties in Serbia and Vojvodina, the “generation of Milosevic children without a future”, who participated in the forces that pursued democratic changes in 2000.

What S.O.N.S. wants to achieve with this project is to emphasize to young members of national minorities, that elections are one of the basic institutions of modern democracy.

The first discussion was held on May 24th in Temerin in the Culture Centre at 6 pm. Temerin is the centre of the township with the same name, where most inhabitants are Hungarians. There were over 100 people and Milos Savin, S.O.N.S. president, opened the discussion. The other speaker was Czaba Horvat, from Youth Web of Vojvodina.

The second presentation was held on May 26th in the Culture Centre in Svetozar Miletic at 7 pm. This place is mostly inhabited by Croatian Bunjevci minority and approximately 100 people attended the discussion. The speakers were Srdjan Belic from S.O.N.S. and Tomislav Pujic and Vladislav Hrnjak from Youth Web of Vojvodina.

In Uzdin, a place with mostly Romanian inhabitants, the discussion was held in the hall of the Culture Centre on May 28, at 7.30 pm. It was attended by around 60 people. The speakers were Dejan Acanski and Srdjan Belic from S.O.N.S. and Danijela Barbu from the YWV.

In Kustilj, mostly inhabited by Romanians, the discussion was held on Thursday, June 3rd in the Culture Centre at 8 pm. The speakers were Milos Savin and Srdjan Belic from S.O.N.S and Florina Frcila from YWV. It was attended by over 60 people.

In Djurdjevo, the discussion was held on June 4th at 7 pm in the main hall of the Culture Centre, in front of around 70 citizens, mostly Russins. The speakers were Vladimir Sabados from YWV and Ivan Moritz and Milos Savin from S.O.N.S.

In Backi Petrovac, the presentation was held inthe Culture Centre on Saturday, June 5th at 6.30 pm. The speakers were Dejan Acanski and Ivan Moritz from S.O.N.S. and Pavel Pavlik from local non-governmental organization, YWV member. There were around 100 people.

Muzlja, a village inhabited mostly by Hungarians, hosted the discussion on Sunday, June 6th, in the Culture Centre at 5 pm. It was attended by around 60 local people and the speakers were Csaba Horvat from YWV and Srdjan Belic and Milos Savin from S.O.N.S.

The discussion in Backi Breg was held on Monday, June 7th in the Culture Centre at 7 pm. The speakers were Josip Majer and Istvan Sarok from YWV and Srdjan Belic from S.O.N.S. The discussion was attended by approximately 70 people from Croatian and Hungarian national minorities.

The Slovakian national minority was invited to vote in the presidential elections by YWV member Janko Pekar in a discussion in Selenca on June 8th at 6 p.m. in the Culture Centre. The other speakers were Milos Savin and Dejan Acanski from S.O.N.S. It was attended by over 80 people.

Ruski Krstur was the site of the last discussion, held on June 9th at 6.30 pm, one day before the pre-electoral discussion started. The speakers were Miroslav Kolesar from YWV, Ivan Moritz and Milos Savin from S.O.N.S. It was attended by 100 citizens of Russin nationality.

All discussions lasted around one hour or slightly more and were accompanied with daily activities of giving out leaflets and music from public loudspeakers. Two days before each discussion, posters inviting citizens to attend the discussion and go out in the elections were set in each town. Both younger and older citizens attended the discussions, and most of the questions during discussions came from older visitors. Young people were mostly involved in leaflet sharing and asked their questions after the discussions. The promotional material was also distributed in other Vojvodinian towns and villages in where there are YWV partners, namely in Novi Sad, Kova~ica, Melenci, Kikinda, Se~anj, Titel, Irig, Kula, Kumane, Ba~, Aleksandrovo, Kisa} and @abalj. The material has been distributed as shown in the following table. The main criterion for division of material between towns was the number of inhabitants.

“SONS POSTER”

Total - Given out before the first round of the elections:4000 Posters, 2000 Flyers, 400 Authorised Guernica T-shirts, 400 Illustrated brochures, 4000 Pencils, 4000 Lighters.Left for the second round: 1000 Posters, 500 Flyers, 100 Authorised Guernica T-shirts, 100 Illustrated brochures, 1000 Pencils, 1000 Lighters.In the folowing cities:Temerin, Svetozar Miletic, Uzdin Kustilj, Djurdjevo, Backi Petrovac,Muzlja, Backi Breg, Selenca, Ruski Krstur, Novi Sad, Kovacica, Melenci, Kikinda, Secanj, Titel, Irig, Kula, Kumane, Bac, Aleksan-drovo,Kisac, Zabalj.

VOICE OF DIFFERENCEGroup for Promotion of Women's Political Rights

PRO ELECTORAL CAMPAIGN

IT'S TIGHT

June, 2004.

The campaign

Voice of Difference decided to organize the campaign in the second round of presidential elections. Our material had urgent GTV message >>>It's tight<<< with direction to the democratic politics we have been choosing.

We decided to lead citizens' campaign to stress the values and responsibilities and activism of citizens which is the legacy of October 5, 2000. Since we had good response in April 2004 when we organized Citizens' /People's/ Initiative against the law for financial support to Hague detainees and their families, we used the same method to position our groups Voice of Difference and Women in Black as initial logistics bodies. Citizens were invited as activists.

Contacts in 44 towns joined the campaign as starting points. This time we had some new partners and in some of the towns various groups agreed to organize the campaign together. Each city planned the campaign on their own terms. They decided on the number of leaflets and transparents, and forms.

Most of the logistic and local organization of the campaign was done by activists of women's groups, human rights centers and committees, citizens' parliaments, NGOs who were engaged in 2000 campaign and individual citizens with involvement of young activists.

Cities involved: Belgrade, Pirot, Dimitrovgrad, Negotin, Zajecar, Prijepolje, Vrbas, Obilic, Sombor, Kragujevac, Nis, Novi Pazar, Tutin, Kraljevo, Subotica, Zrenjanin,Knjazevac, Krusevac, Pozarevac, Pozega, Novi Sad, Trstenik, Leskovac, Smederevska Palanka, Aleksinac, Paracin, Curprija, Jagodina, Smederevo, Pancevo, Novi Becej, Arandjelovac,Valjevo, Bor, Velika Plana, Petrovac na Mlavi Nova Varos, Lucani, Zitiste, Lebane, Plandiste, Uzice, Vranje, Cacak.

In Belgrade, June 18-24, from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. activists organized the spot in the very down town of Belgrade, with our transparents and leaflets. We tried to engage as many citizens passers-by to be the activists and to deliver the leaflets to their neighborhood. In Belgrade we distributed 200,000 leaflets.

Since it was citizens' campaign, permanent one with the engaging slogan the newspaper Politika, on June 23rd, put the photo of our transparent and activities on its front page as an illustration for the article on elections.

The transparents were on three prominent buildings. We contacted 90 years old lady "granny Olga", who was symbol of citizens' demonstrations 1996/7, and she hosted our canvas on her balcony. She sent her written message to the final convention of the democratic candidate and when it was over the procession passed her balcony, greeting her. It was touchy moment for citizens being reminded of these months long citizens' protests.

So, the campaign sent the whole message succeeding to connect the memories of crucial moments of citizens' engagement around the issue of elections. It succeeded to engage citizens directly. We promoted political engagement of women and made coalitions with new partners from civil society in Serbia.

Out of 1,789,313 voters registered in election lists on selected election sites, 845,632 voters or 47.02% of them voted in the first round, and in the second round out of 1,803,035 voters 880,524 voters or 48.84% of them voted. Bearing in mind that 56.67% voters (58.75% of the whole of the voting body) voted on these election sites at the Parliamentary elections in December 2003, the response on these election sites in the first round decreased less than on the whole of the voting body. On the whole of the voting body the decrease was 11.37% of the whole of the voting body (from 58.75% to 47.48%), and on the selected election sites it was 9.65% (from 56.67% to 47.02%). In the second round the increase of the response on this group of election sites (compared to the first round) was greater than on the whole of the voting body. On the whole of the voting body the increase was 0.06% (from 47.48% to 48.1%), and on the selected election sites it was 1.82% (from 47.02% to 48.84%). Notice that these parameters tell us that the response was much “better” on the selected election sites, both in the first and in the second round than the response on the rest of the election sites and on the whole of the election body. The increase of the response had to affect the election results of both of the candidates on these election sites.

On the selected election sites at the Parliamentary elections (December 2003) Serbian Radical Party won 215,416 votes (11.98% of those in the voting lists on these election sites), and Democratic Party won 156,389 votes (or 8.7% of the total number of votes on the selected election sites). SRS won 16.17% of votes in the voting lists on the whole of the voting body, and DP won 7.37%. So, on the selected election sites SRS was weaker by 4.19% than on the whole of the voting body. On the other hand, DP had a result on these election sites by 1.37% better than on the whole of the election body.

In the first round Nikolic won 196,016 votes on the selected election sites, or 10.9% of the total number of votes in the voting lists on the selected election sites, and Tadic won 317,872 or 17.68%. Nikolic had the decrease by 19,400 (or 1.1%) of votes compared to SRS, and Tadic won more than two times more votes compared to DP and he won 161,483 votes more (or 9% of the votes from the voting lists on these election sites). On the whole of the election body, Tadic's increase compared to DP was smaller and it was 5.7% of the voting body. Nikolic's decrease on the whole of the voting body was greater and it amounted to 1.6% of the voting body. We can notice that both of the candidates were better on the selected election sites than on the whole of the election body. That is because the campaign on these election sites increased the response compared to the rest of the voting body. But, Boris Tadic had much greater resources there, and so was his result accordingly (i.e. the increase of the number of votes compared to DP).

In the second round on the selected election sites, Nikolic won 299,730 votes (or 16.6% of the total number of votes on the selected election sites) and Tadic won 569,965 (or 31.6%). On the whole of the voting body, Nikolic's increase was 21.8% of the voting body, and Tadic's was 25.8%. On the rest of the election sites Nikolic's increase was greater than Tadic's and it was 23.8%. Tadic's increase on the rest was 23.6%. If we excluded the voters from the selected election sites from voting body and all the election sites in Kosovo where Nikolic won by far, Nikolic would have won the elections. On the election sites outside Kosovo, which were not selected, he won 1,093,908 votes and Tadic won 1,084,440 votes. If we included Kosovo, the difference would be much greater.

Notice that, in case the increase of the number of voters who voted for Tadic in the first round on the selected election sites had not happened, Nikolic would have won the elections. On these election sites Nikolic's increase between the two election rounds was 103,714 and Tadic's was 252,093 votes.

On the whole of the voting body Tadic won 245,036 votes more than Nikolic did, and on the selected election sites 270,235. So, on approximately 7,000 election sites that were not selected, Nikolic won 25,199 votes more than Tadic did, and he did not win the elections because Tadic had an unbeatable advance on the selected election sites.

OVERALL RESULTS OF THE CAMPAIGNElection results on selected election sites

1. Political Environment

In the run-up to the presidential elections, Serbia is going through another difficult period. Cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) is not considered to be satisfactory, harmonization of the internal market with Montenegro is blocked by questions arising from 56 agricultural products. These issues prevent a positive feasibility study on opening negotiations on the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA), which in turn strengthens anti-reformist forces. An obstacle is also the postponement of membership for Serbia and Montenegro in the Partnership for Peace scheme (PfP). After the unrests and ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Kosovo last March, the parliament of Serbia launched a plan for Kosovo that advocated territorial and cultural autonomy for five Serbian settlements in the province but went without support of the Albanian side and without clear response from international community. Drafting a Serbian constitution has proved to be a lengthy process. The trial on the assassination of Prime Minister Djindjic is a permanent source of tensions and speculations, without prospects for successful completion in the near future. Social problems are aggravating as reforms have contributed to rising unemployment and have not yet resulted in the expected growth of the private sector. Reforms in the education system have been blocked as have some changes in the judiciary system.

However, macroeconomic stability has been extended and the Serbian parliament enacted several important economic laws prepared by the previous government. Foreign trade and industrial production have seen dynamic growth in the first quarter of 2004. It seems that economic and political trends have developed apart. Although there have been tangible achievements at the local level, these have not come to be properly evaluated and reflected in the political balance sheets. In the field of foreign policy, continuity with previous Council of Ministers of the State Union has been considerable. Reforms in the defense sector continued, and in several areas (mostly economic ones) some legal and institutional improvements have been introduced.

It should be stressed that the latest opinion polls indicate an overwhelming support of Serbian and Montenegrin citizens for European integration. On the other hand, one can observe a lack of adequate approaches of state structures and political parties to European integration, and insufficient levels of awareness and knowledge about the EU persist. While in both republics, over 80% of the citizens (82% in Serbia and 83% in Montenegro) would vote for EU accession in a referendum, only 28% of the Montenegrin population (data from October 2003) and 33% of Serbian (April 2004) is satisfied with the performance of the administration. To this contradictory and confusing general picture of Serbia, a further aspect will be added in June, with the presidential elections. Whether the elections will mark another step backwards or the opening of new prospects for enhancing reforms and further European and Euro-Atlantic integration of Serbia and Montenegro will much depend on the involvement of civil society and the proper articulation and coordination of its efforts.

2. Election-Related Events

The last week was marked by dramatic events. Djindjic's sister was attacked by two men at her home and sedated. This happened two days after Kostunica's announcement that he will protect the Djindjic family. A wave of reactions followed and condemned this incident. On Tuesday, Kostunica's Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) election headquarters issued a statement accusing Boris Tadic (the current presidential candidate and head of the Democratic Party DS) and Zoran Zivkovic (former Prime Minister) of being involved in the assassination of Djindjic and asking them both them to tell to the public who inspired the killing. An enormous scandal ensued. Dragan Marsicanin, candidate of the ruling coalition, backed the statement by saying it was true and a very “masculine” answer to attacks on him.Boris Tadic expressed his disgust with the statement and called for a civilized campaign that should aim to prevent the Radical Party candidate (Tomislav Nikolic) from taking office. He also said that despite this barbarian attack on him, he will support Marsicanin in the second round against the radical Nikolic if those were the alternatives.

Communication on Serbia May 24, 2004 Weekly update prepared by Jelica Minic & Miljenko Dereta

The state union of Serbia and Montenegro (SCG) is made up of two member states, the state of Montenegro and the state of Serbia that includes the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina and the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija which is currently under an international administration in accordance with United Nations Security Council resolution 1244. The State Union of Serbia and Montenegro was proclaimed on 4 February 2003 is based on the equality of the two member states, the state of Serbia and the state of Montenegro. Under the Constitutional Charter, the Assembly of Serbia and Montenegro exercises legislative power, the executive power is vested with the President of SCG (elected by the SCG Assembly) and the Council of Ministers that he chairs and runs and finally the judicial power is vested with the Court of Serbia and Montenegro.So far, all effective power within the State Union was in the hands of the member states, i.e. the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro. The Constitutional Charter has two different and distinct economic systems of the member states as a starting point and it gives a projection of common market inception for the creation and operation of which the responsibility lies with the member state. At the same time, the creation of the common market is also the normative goal of the Union itself.

No.1

All of this happened after results of polls indicated that Tadic was receiving more support in the public than Marsicanin. Very apparently, the ruling coalition is getting increasingly irritated as only a victory in the presidential elections will guarantee the survival of the current government. The main impression one gets is that the ruling coalition is running against Djindjic and his political heritage.

It is obvious that the DS is under much pressure as a known supporter of Djindjic, M. Kostic, is being accused of involvement in the so-called “sugar affair” and persecuted by police as a criminal (although the prosecution admits that his share in the re-export of EU sugar is 0,19%). Kostic accused M. Labus as being responsible for this affair. In fact, he was summoned to the police for an informative conversation when in Montenegro on a business trip, and he requested that this talk be held after his return. In response, the police issued an “arrest warrant” and blocked the B92 television studio where Kostic was to appear. This evolved into a massive affair that demonstrated the governments intention to further compromise the DS and Tadic by all means.

It needs to emphasised that the main faultline runs within the “democratic block” rather than between democrats and the Radical Party. As a result, the public is confused and appalled.

The Main Candidates

There are 12 confirmed candidates, including Princess Catherine Karadjordjevic! Of these, only 4 candidates play a significant role:-Tomislav Nikolic from Seselj's Radical Party may receive between 26 and 30 % of votes. He is an ultra-nationalist and former ally of Milosevic, a populist demagogue calling for bred-prices of 3 dinars (0.05 Euros) and a desaster for the country. He ended his first speech with a “Long live Greater Serbia!” Absolutely intolerant to NGOs, he put together black-lists of journalists and public individuals seen as “traitors paid by the West”.

-Boris Tadic from Democratic Party is the successor of Djindjic in that party, a very moderate, pro-European, reformist and civilized politician. Support for him is growing and currently stands at around 22%. He is the candidate NGOs will support.

-Dragan Marsicanin, vice-president of Kostunica's DSS, is the candidate of the ruling coalition. In all his public appearances, he speaks after Kostunica, Labus, Dinkic and others, and his appearance is the weakest. A party bureaucrat without any charisma, he uses every opportunity to criticize Djindjic, his government and reforms. Opinion polls show support for him standing at around 18%. The consequence of his election as a president would be that Kostunica, as the president of his party, could force Marsicanin President of Serbia to support everything that the Prime Minister (again Kostunica) wants him to.-Bogoljub Karic is one of the richest individuals in Serbia and figures as an independent candidate. He surprised everybody when he reached 11% support within less than two weeks. He can be expected to take most radical and socialist votes, which would benefit the democratic candidates. He may even come in third and outnumber Marsicanin.

3. NGOs in Serbia Facing a New Challenge

In the current climate of overall disappointment, dissatisfaction and disorientation on the political scene of Serbia in the run-up to the presidential elections, a group of NGO leaders decided that only public pressure could re-emphasise European and Euro-Atlantic integration of Serbia and Montenegro as crucial issues for the future of the country and as the main anchor of reforms initiated after the political changes of October 2000. The upcoming presidential elections on June 13 and local elections in September 2004 provide good occasions to raise the voice of civil society and to act together draw public attention back to those vital issues, which have become marginalized in the pre-electoral political debates.

The NGO community in Serbia decided to strengthen the pro-European and pro-reformist option and to help improving the environment for and the articulation of political programs of democratic forces, all of which are faced with serious challenges and deficits after three and half years after the fall of Milosevic's regime.

An NGO initiative to build political consensus on EU integration was successfully launched on May 20 in the parliament of Serbia. A working group, established by the committee for European Integration in the parliament, started to draft a resolution on European integration that is expected to be finalized immediately after the second round of the presidential elections on June 27. All parliamentary parties except Radical Party nominated their representatives to the working group. The main objection of the Radical Party was that the parliamentary committee on European integration “is not competent for drafting the resolution,” although their president and presidential candidate Tomislav Nikolic is vice-president of that committee. Obviously, this European integration is not an area, in which the radicals consider themselves competitive enough. However, they announced “to be ready to support the resolution if it will be acceptable for them”. The Socialist Party announced that it will take part in drafting the resolution but that it “cannot accept its pro-NATO formulations”.The NGO European Movement in Serbia ( www.emins.org), which initiated the resolution on

European integration has its representative in the drafting group. This is a precedent in the history of the Serbian parliament. None of the parties had objections on the very prominent role of this NGO in this fundamental parliamentary activity.

Efforts at consensus-building are strongly demanded by public opinion and well received by political players and media not only in Serbia but also in Montenegro. Public interest is growing daily, and in most electronic and print media the consensus issue has become a standard question and reason for positive comments. Although currently focused on the question of European integration, such consensus also seems relevant for the wider debate on the fundamental interests of the country.

This project, comprising the same activities in the parliament of Montenegro and in the parliament of the State Union as well as a preparatory study on public opinion, was supported by the OSCE mission in Belgrade. It follows the previous study “Institutional Capacities of Legislative Bodies in Serbia and Montenegro for Participation in the Process of European Integration”, which was successfully completed by the European Movement in Serbia in February 2004, with a recommendation to launch a resolution on European Integration in the parliament of Serbia and Montenegro.

Besides the coincidence of a NGO initiative and presidential elections, there is a project for a two-level pro-electoral campaign involving large numbers of NGOs and NGO networks in Serbia. It involves several steps, forms, type of materials, phases and players, and most importantly follow up activities.

Plan of Activities for the Presidential Elections:

1. Maps of targeted polling stations, municipalities and towns in Serbia to be approached by NGO campaign: 6 maps of CESID (Center for Free Elections and Democracy www.cesid.org - complete “electoral geography of Serbia”), 5 CESID targeted towns, main partners' network of Civic Initiatives ( www.gradjanske.org - from the Federation of 450 NGOs of Serbia), 31 local councils of the European Movement in Serbia, coverage of Creative Youth of Novi Sad and a cross-section of all 5 previous maps.

2. Two phases of the campaign are envisaged: before June13, and between June 13 and 27. The main stress will be put on the first phase in order to strengthen democratic candidates sufficiently to prevent, if possible, the candidate of Radical Party to enter the second round.

3. A big conference of FENS (Federation of NGOs of Serbia) organised by Civic Initiatives has already been announced for the 19/20 June, in between the two rounds of the elections, and we expect around 400 participant NGOs. A strong political statement is to be issued and will be published in nation-wide newspapers. 4. A two-level campaign will be launched in order to provide wider coverage and involvement of more participants of civil society.

NGOs will:

-distribute letters, leaflets, balloons and small paper flags with appropriate messages (CESID, Civic Initiatives, European Movement in Serbia, Creative Youth of Novi Sad)-organize very simple public events for youth in town squares all over Serbia with music and distribution of pro-election materials on June 11 (European Movement in Serbia, Creative Youth of Novi Sad)-organize a public debate with the three presidential candidates (Tadic, Marsicanin, Karic) representing the democratic and pro-European option (European Movement in Serbia) Media will:

-perform a TV debate on the presidential elections with NGO leaders and those criticizing them on BK Television (CESID, Civic Initiatives, European Movement in Serbia)-organize on TV Pink (on Belgrade side) a TV bridge Belgrade Bratislava on the elections to the European Parliament and the Serbian presidential elections, both taking place on June 13, with young politicians running for the European Parliament in Slovakia and members of the Serbian political parties and parliament to discuss their political views and experiences (Civic Initiatives)-pose a question to the citizens in Serbia: why are you going to vote? on TV B92 from the beginning of June -hold a TV debate on political consensus on European Integration at RTS 1 (European Movement in Serbia).

5.These experiences of NGOs, media networking and activism as well as the fine-tuning of main political, social, economic and broader interactive messages will be used in the local elections in September, as the main follow up and corrective factor of the presidential elections in June. All NGOs are highly concerned about the possible outcome of the local elections. These are seen to depend on the results of the presidential elections and will be conditioned by evident deficits of the democratic and administrative capacity at the local level, where a strong partisan logic should be

exposed to the competition of a new concept of coalition building at the local level corresponding to the national consensus building at the state level.

4. Donors role

This campaign is taking place at a moment when the NGO sector is in a very delicate phase. Many donors are leaving the country or substantially reduce their funding. Most NGOs are fighting for survival, and with several local ones are closing down. All this is quite disturbing as political developments show that the democratization processes are at their very beginning and that the role of civil society is underestimated and marginalized. Unfortunately donors behave as if democracy had already been established in Serbia.

This is best demonstrated by the fact that NGOs receive very small donor support for these elections. The main funding went to CESID, which is simultaneously an election monitoring organization. Based on their data bases, they can target very precisely those places with the greatest “democratic potential”. There are only two other local “redistributors of funds” for very small local campaigns in Leskovac and Nis. Everybody is aware that, once again, everything is done at the last moment and there is no possibility for longer presence in chosen communities. All this gives reason for concern as there is much need for NGOs to be involved in the local elections scheduled for September 5.

We decided to establish tight cooperation for the upcoming elections, to concentrate our activities based on CESID target areas, and to increase the number of towns. In this phase of possible democratic consolidation (or else the opening of a new crisis), Serbian NGOs need the strong support of foreign donors and a wider mobilization of domestic ones. They plan to develop some activities even without outside support but in that case, intensity and visibility will be very limited. Bearing in mind that Serbian citizens are not very motivated to vote in these elections after three unsuccessful attempts, and given that mutual accusations of democratic candidates diminish their chances in the second round, it is necessary to have a visible NGO campaign and to stress the importance of the European and Euro-Atlantic Integration of Serbia and Montenegro.

Remembering the contribution of NGOs to the democratic changes in 2000, and their capacity to connect the different pro-democratic and pro-reformist players in society and to overcome partisan divisions, it is necessary to enable and encourage NGOs to perform their role. Their task lies in addressing those important issues that are omitted by other political and social players (ICTY, PfP, decentralization, good governance, consensus building on reforms and European integration etc.), and the pre-election period provides a good occasion to highlight those problems.

With all due respect for their long-term programs, projects and achievements, the European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR), the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the US Agency for International Development (USAID), national foundations and other donor institutions are invited to contribute to the efforts of civil society in Serbia to mobilize the democratic forces in the country to successfully overcome the current political crisis and to accelerate the process of reforms and integration into European and Euro-Atlantic Structures. The forthcoming presidential elections are the first and decisive step at this direction.

1.Presidential campaignMutual accusations of democratic candidates, mainly from Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) towards Democratic Party (DS), slightly slowed down because they ruined the position of DSS candidate Marsicanin. However, it is expected that in last 10 days unscrupulous campaign will be intensified. Most probably, it will be related to 100 days of the new government and its “achievements” comparing to “deficiencies” of the previous one led by DS and to M. Ulemek “Legija” who is indicted as a leading figure in organizing the assassination of Serbian Prime Minister Djindjic, and who is expected to accuse Djindjic's own party DS to be involved (as in recent accusations of DSS). According to reliable public polls, candidate of Radical Party (RS), Nikolic, will have over 30% of votes, Tadic (DS) around 26%, Marsicanin (DSS) 13-14% and Karic around 10%. There are some indications that Tadic is tending to leave Nikolic behind him. Preferences of voters could change during the last 10 days of presidential campaign with good chances for a democratic candidate to win in the second round. In the case that the democratic candidate with better score in the first round gets votes of the other democratic candidate at the list, it is a realistic assumption. Otherwise if the campaign is to be too dirty, it will be hardly possible.It is encouraging that in the last phase of the presidential campaign messages are becoming better articulated, more pro-European, with greater focus on economic and social affairs and in general better corresponding with the aspirations and expectations of the citizens of Serbia.

2.Political Environment Although presidential campaign is the top issue of public interest, foreign affairs are also very high at the agenda. The most recent EU enlargement and fast progress of Croatia in achieving the candidate status for the EU membership sobered up wider public. Why we are not there? How much time do we need? What should be done? Having in mind very high support for EU integration (82-85% according to different public polls), there is a chance that there will be higher public (and political) responsiveness to the Brussels conditionality, if not manifested in a too humiliating manner. Thanks to much higher presence of Serbia and Montenegro relations with Brussels in media (sugar affair and problems with the textile agreement) citizens became aware that Brussels demands concerning functional internal market and common trade and customs policies are more than legitimate. Second condition, the full cooperation with the Hague Tribunal has more and more been understood as a main obstacle in developing closer relations with the EU but also for the participation in the NATO Program “Partnership for Peace”, as well as a precondition to get certification from the US administration enabling further progress in trade and assistance programs and political cooperation. Media are fully exploiting these issues according to the time schedule of related events (forthcoming negotiations on textile, NATO meeting in Istambul etc.).

On the other hand, cooperation with neighboring countries has continued to progress. President of Serbia and Montenergo visited Croatia and Romania, MFA of Croatia Zuzul visited Belgrade and presidential candidate Tadic visited Hungary and met MFA Kovacs. Serbia and Montenegro and Romania had performed successful military exercise of anti-terrorist forces and Bulgaria asked for diplomatic intervention of Serbia and Montenegro in Libia in order to help arrested medical stuff with death penalty verdict.

Economy is performing well with intensified legislative activity supporting reforms. But there is a danger that populist policy (fast growth of salaries, subsidies to state companies and protectionist measures) could endanger prospects for a sustainable long-term growth.The assassination of an eminent journalist in Podgorica is a new provocation at the turbulent political scene in Serbia and Montenegro. The editor in chief of the opposition (pro-Serbian) daily news “Dan”, Dusko Jovanovic, was assassinated on May 27, in front of his office. Protests of journalists in Montenegro and Serbia were supplemented by political protests in Podgorica and accusations of the authorities for inefficiency in protecting public figures and even for the murder. This provoked a new wave of protests for unresolved previous assassinations of two distinguished journalists in Serbia in last five years. All three journalists had a common preoccupation criticizing illegal or criminal activities of some structures in the administration. The most recent assassination increased the feeling of insecurity and stressed the fragility of the freedom of expression and independence in the media 5 years after Milosevic. A new law on education has been adopted in the parliament after two all night sessions. In a way this new law stopped all reforms in education and re-installed old time school system. This creates quite a confusion in schools and generates dissatisfaction, uncertainty and apathy.Apart from the change of the main strategy, a big reproach is that there was no public debate on such an important issue and that the whole process of change was done in extremely short period of time and without participation of experts. It seems that the goal was to pass the law before the evaluation of the first year of practice of reformed school.

3.Power of bottom-up changesAt the local level there are numerous potential sources of tensions political, social and ethnic with uneven geographical distribution. That is why it is necessary to encourage civil society in Serbia to

Communication on Serbia May 31, 2004 Weekly update prepared by Jelica Minic & Miljenko Dereta

No.2

play a role in local elections at the beginning of September 2004, and contribute to the consolidation of democratic forces. As soon as the presidential elections finish, local elections will become the crucial issue in the political life of Serbia, with a potential to further strengthen or maybe slightly correct results of the presidential elections, depending on the winner. For that reason, it is necessary to make a full evidence of the considerable achievements at the local level, during the last 3 and half years after democratic changes. In many towns and municipalities there is an evident improvement of local governance, political culture, communication skills and local infrastructure. All this achievements would not have been possible without foreign assistance not only in financial terms, but even more through introduction of new know - how, breaking of old structures, changing the balance of power and through opening the window of opportunity for new generations of politicians and activists of civil society. A new generation of young leaders has been emerging at the local level after years of political turbulences, conflicts and isolation.

Local programs of assistance are crucial in re-establishing confidence into international community, contributing at the same time to the growth of self-confidence. The generation of new leaders will bear the greatest burden of “double transition” in Serbia and Montenegro - the one, from a communist-like society to the democratic one with a market economy, and the other, from war to peace economy and society. Transition from war to peace has not been finished yet, in a great extent because of the permanent shadow of the Kosovo problem and the feeling of unfinished state.

4.Position of civil society As it was stressed by V.Matic, editor in chief of TV and Radio B92, „departure of so many donors from Serbia and the Balkans poses a serious threat to the ideas of civil society and the struggle for human rights. Those who believe that big social changes will take place overnight and unfold by themselves, risk allowing Serbia and the Balkans to plunge into an even worse nightmare when the next crisis comes along. The events of March 17 in Kosovo illustrate how swiftly and radically things can change in the region.“

On the other hand, the potential strength of the civil society in Serbia should not be underminded. One example, the intense involvement of NGOs in the affair of occupation of TV Smederevo by local authorities got important coverage in all media. A petition of NGOs was signed by more than hundred organizations and delivered to the court that is investigating journalists based on accusations from the municipality. All employees are on strike more than six weeks and were enthousiastic about the support organised by the NGOs. A new press conference will be held in Belgrade in order to stress that closing down this TV station would influence election campaigns.

Mobilization of civil society around presidential and local elections could help considerably to its consolidation and visibility, especially at the local level. According to the study of the Center for Political Alternatives „Aspirations of the Citizens of Serbia and Montenegro, 2004“, publicly promoted on May 26, and supported by UNDP and Friedrich Ebert Fondation, NGOs have higher rating than political parties in the public perception. Generally, the level of confidence of citizens into institutions representing their interests is very low. The highest 21% is for the Parliament (including republican and State union levels), 14% for Government and the ministries and 10% for political parties. Autonomous associations of citizens have in that competition a rather high score - 12% for NGOs and 9% for professional associations. These two types of associations together have the same score as the Parliament. It shows the deep institutional crisis, but at the same time the good chance for strengthening civil society. This public poll shows that experts are highly estimated in the society, with a good prospects for a more influential role of think-tanks.

It is also encouraging that the same study shows recovery of Serbian society in many aspects. Economic and social issues are predominat in the structure of their aspirations but the rule of law also has a very high rating (40%) second after living standard (58%). Achivement of national interests, the main preocupation in previous decade, has got only 6% of votes, at the list of 9 goals to be reached in order for Serbia and Montenegro to be a good place for living (it was possible to underline 1, 2 or 3 prefered options).

However, this potential for rational political choices could easily be converted into populism and political crisis with a new wave of radicalism. The democratic political forces bear full responsibility for preventing such development and they again need again full support for their coordinated and concerted effort.

Presidential campaign

Presidential campaign is entering its last phase. According to the different public polls, candidate of the Radical Party, Nikolic is expected to get from 30-37% votes in the first round, candidate of Democratic Party, Tadic 23-27% votes, candidate of Democratic Party of Serbia, Marsicanin 11-18% and candidate of a group of citizens, Karic 9%. Several independent sources are showing, more or less, the same differences in relative strength of presidential candidates.

It seems that high rating of Nikolic is in a considerable extent due to the dissatisfaction of citizens with two successive governments after the democratic changes in the year 2000, and a way to punish their personification Tadic and Marsicanin. Nikolic is more and more attacking the actual government, stating that “Kostunica is the greatest enemy of Serbia” and that he plans to dissolve the Government after winning the elections. This would lead to new parliamentary elections

According to an extensive press clipping dossier of the Ebart Agency national issue is no more dominant, although it is still relevant for all candidates. There is an impression that the presidential candidates increasingly respect the expressed expectations of citizens concerning social and economic issues. The political response was rather populist, and focused on the losers in the transition process, especially in the campaigns of Karic and Dacic (from the Socialist Party).

Nikolic has a rather consistent and consequent campaign with visible polishing of his previous positions. He stresses that he is supported by Milosevic, that he relies equally on the East (Russia, China, India) as on the West, that he supports integration into the EU, but that it is not the near future, that PfP is acceptable but not NATO membership, that he is not going to arrest but either prevent arresting of inductees for the Hague Tribunal.

Tadic has a rather vague campaign, but with a consequent respect of democratic values and principles, with good message to national minorities and with explicit positive messages concerning EU and Euro-Atlantic integration, regional cooperation, fight against organized crime. He insists on presidential control of the legislative and executive power in Serbia, and stresses that he will support other democratic presidential candidate if he qualifies for the second round.

The campaign of Marsicanin is completely negative. He accused Tadic for all sins of the previous government, and Nikolic for the period before October 2000. In the later phase of his campaign he also started to attack Karic, opening the third front. He focused completely on legalism and necessity to fight organized crime, without elaborated messages to different target groups. At the same time he is calling this campaign the “dirtiest until now” although he is the only one using, what he calls “criticism” of other candidates.

Karic is, according to many annalists, the most innovative, stressing the potentials and strength of Serbia, business development, regional cooperation, importance of cross-border cooperation, importance of knowledge and young educated generations, EU integration and will of Europe to help and integrate Serbia and Montenegro if the laws and standards are respected as in Slovenia and Croatia. He offers business, economic cooperation and common interests as a formula for improving relations between Serbia and Montenegro, and with Kosovo and Metohija within Serbia. He insists that Serbia should respect its international obligations including the cooperation with the Hague Tribunal. His attitude toward inclusion into NATO programs is positive. Everyone expected him to take voters from the Radical party and Nikolic, but analysts find that he is in fact taking most of the votes from Marsicanin, DSS.

Popular expectations

Poverty, unemployment, concerns about children, lack of perspective and problems of the health and health care are at the top of personal priorities of citizens of Serbia. As priorities for the whole society, citizens are stressing low standard of living, economic development, prevention of crime and corruption, growth of employment, integration into the EU and the rule of law. The attitude to the Hague Tribunal is more and more pragmatic, without questioning the necessity to put under trial the war criminals. It is preferred to organize processes in Serbia (51,3%), but there is almost an equal number of those who would persuade 4 accused generals to surrender themselves voluntary, or deliver them to the Tribunal (14,2% and 12,1%).

For Kosovo and Metohija, 33% would prefer the division of the province between Albanians and Serbs, 14,6% would accept its independence, 16,1% welcome long-term UN governance and 11,7% would support return under Serbian rule, even by force, if necessary.The absolute majority of Serbian population is ready to respect the will of citizens of Montenegro

Communication on Serbia June 8, 2004 Weekly update prepared by Jelica Minic & Miljenko Dereta

No.3

concerning the future of the state union. Around 50% would try to keep the common state if possible, 40,9% prefer referendum to be held in Serbia as well, and 10,9% would wait for Montenegro to express its will.

Pre-election initiatives and incidents

The Working group of the Committee of European Integration of the Parliament of Serbia entitled to devise a parliamentary Resolution on European Integration is progressing well with expectation to finish the draft for further political consultations during next week. Today, the Committee on European Integration of the Parliament of Serbia and Montenegro also started some initial preparations for opening the debate on the consensus on European integration.

The Government of Serbia proposed to the Parliament the new Draft Constitution. There is no controversial proposal on regionalization dividing Vojvodina. There is a proposal for direct election of the President of Serbia, and a controversial proposal on Serbia as a State of the Serbian nation and other citizens. The political parties are expected to give their positions at the beginning of the public debate. It has been evaluated as a move of support to Marsicanin as this is in fact the old proposal of DSS accepted by the Government.

Management of youth festival EXIT has been arrested. EXIT is the biggest international music festival in Serbia and is considered to be the sign of return of Serbia to Europe. It gathers hundreds of thousands of young people from the whole region. Since last year an investigation was going on about some misuse of money. The management of EXIT was fully cooperative. On Monday, 7th of June (a month before this years festival) two top managers of EXIT were arrested and will be held in prison for a month «so that they cannot influence witnesses». Strong protests from youth accuse the court that the arrest is fully political as it comes in the pre-election situation. From reliable sources we learned that the whole action was initiated at the demand of the Orthodox Church to DSS. Both DSS and the Church reacted several times against rock music coming from abroad. We believe it might influence affect the elections and Novi Sad and young people, in particular.

Activities of NGOs

NGOs have started their campaigns. CESID letters have been appreciated as informative and useful by those that received them. Leaflets of Civic Initiatives and European Movement in Serbia have now being distributed in 45 communes throughout Serbia. They have also been evaluated as very good, funny and motivating, using simple and understandable language.

A relatively small campaign has been started by the Center for Modern Skills (which is directly linked to Democratic Party and Tadic) with a question Where are you going on Sunday? And the answer: To elections. To elect my president.

It is very good that the presence of NGOs has become visible and that our involvement is a sign of permanent interest and involvement for election and democracy issues.

Since all pools show that Tadic will enter the second round of presidential elections CESID, European Movement in Serbia and Civic Initiatives are in the process of intensive preparations for the second phase of the NGOs campaign. NGOs presence in media has also become more visible.

FIRST ROUND OF ELECTIONS

The first round of Presidential elections in Serbia was held on June 13 with results that importantly changed the political scene. Here are the official results: T. Nikolic (Radical Party-Seselj) got 30,43% (926.456 votes)B. Tadic (Democratic Party) got 27,62% (840.812 votes)B. Karic (Forca Serbia) got 18,18% (553.632 votes)D. Marsicanin (Ruling coalition) got 13,28% (404.199 votes)I. Dacic (Socialist Party) got 4,02% (122.242 votes)

There are several surprising results.

-The first is better than expected result of B. Tadic and small difference from T. Nikolic. It is the most pleasant news for the democratic electorate in Serbia in last months. In his address after the elections Tadic called for full mobilization and unity of the democratic block to support him against the Radical Party. He also declared that he would cooperate with the existing government. We believe that he will succeed to motivate voters in the second round.-The biggest surprise is the result of B. Karic, a Serbian tycoon who got rich in time of wars and sanctions thanks to good neighborhood, financial and political relations with Milosevic. His campaign lasted only four weeks but was very professional, populist and obviously successful. Everybody is trying to calculate whose votes he took and it seems that most of them came from Radical Party, Kostunica's Democratic Party of Serbia and former Socialist Party of Milosevic. It is very hard to predict for whom his voters will vote in the second round. When he started his campaign he publicly declared he would like Tadic to become the president but with such a good result he now calls for negotiations. B. Karic became a political figure that cannot be overlooked in future political life in Serbia.-The great defeat of D. Marsicanin is a big defeat of Government, ruling coalition and specifically of Kostunica and his party DSS. Even before the elections coalition members G17 (Labus) and SPO (Vuk Draskovic) publicly announced that if Tadic goes into second round they would support him. They confirmed this decision after the results were available. Before the elections Kostunica said that this option is not something he is thinking about. After the election he is holding “consultative meeting with coalition partners on the future of the government” and still have not gone public with his party position. There is no doubt that this is the first serious defeat of Kostunica but it is no surprise to anyone except him. A “down the hill” trend of his popularity from one election to the next was visible and expected. We believe he was punished also because he did not take part in the elections himself but “delegated” his vice-president Marsicanin, a pale, boring and aggressive person. One of the pearls of his campaign was a statement: “I do not understand how other candidates can smile all the time. The situation in Serbia is so serious that there is nothing to be happy about and smile!”-The result of the Radical Party and T. Nikolic is less than expected which is also good news. Naturally, they are still saying that they will win in the second round but it is visible that they are seriously worried. Their rhetoric became more nationalistic and radical and they will have to follow the messages coming from Seselj in Hague who is reviving the idea of Great Serbia that include large parts of Croatia and Bosnia. We believe that it will result in smaller percentage of voters for Karic to return to Radical Party electorate.

ROLE OF NGO CAMPAIGNS

NGOs developed several GOTV campaigns. The common point was very precise targeting (to a voting post with specific addresses) based on CESIDs data bases and analysis.

CESID had 300.000 letters sent and a TV clip promoting elections as such. One of the feedbacks we got (from a dentist's chair) was that “I got a letter. It is really nice and helps the undecided.” In the night after electionsCESID was the first to come with result estimations that proved to be absolutely precise.

Civic Initiatives and FENS distributed around half a million leaflets in 60 municipalities targeted by CESID. They were put in mail boxes or given directly to people by more than 600 young activists of local NGOs. Although there was absolutely no mentioning of candidates or parties several people's reaction was: “But I am already going to vote for him.” “Who is him?” “Boris Tadic.” We see this as “mission accomplished”.The day before the electoral silence we published one of the leaflets as supplements in two dailies Blic and Danas also with very good reactions. SEE ATT. 1

Communication on Serbia June 15, 2004 Weekly update prepared by Jelica Minic & Miljenko Dereta

No.4

European Movement in Serbia (EMinS) organized public events dedicated especially to indecisive young people, potential pro-European and democratic voters in Serbia.The message “VOTE FOR EUROPE” was printed on the posters, leaflets, balloons and T shirts our volunteers wore during the public campaigns. In 30 Local Councils all over Serbia and in Belgrade (31 total) central events were organized in the town centers and most frequent boulevards gathering places of the citizens. The campaign included positioning of the posters “Vote for Europe” with information about central event timing and distribution of the material leaflets with message of the youth to the future president of Serbia, popular balloons and European flags.

Appropriate cultural/music events were prepared at the same time concerts of local popular groups, rock bands, classical music orchestra and DJs bringing the positive spirit and aimed at motivating young people to actively engage in their future designing.

The campaign which was at the same time pro-electoral and pro-European was the first event of its kind ever to be organized in multiethnic communities like Novi Pazar and some smaller municipalities and was no doubt welcomed and successful. Even though it was severely criticized by the Radical Party as anti-Radical campaign it only invited citizens to vote for the democratic and European candidate. The citizens responded positively to the EMinS messages and were very supportive for the idea of “European president” promoted by EMinS, especially evaluating its preferred characteristics of uncorrupted and democratic. EMinS campaign in 31 towns received substantial coverage at local media as well as at the national level. Leadership of the EMinS took part in the media campaign (talk shows, interviews, articles, reviews).

Center for Modern Skills also had a campaign “Where are you going out on Sunday? To elections!” which included leaflets and a TV commercial.

The first results show that in the places that were targeted the best ever results for democratic candidates were achieved. We all learned quite a lot on how not to waste human and financial resources on “general campaigns” as well as the benefits of cooperation.

PREPARATIONS FOR THE SECOND ROUND

The second round will be quite different and we are already defining our strategy and our messages. CESID will do the new targeting and Civic Initiatives and EPUS will develop materials and actions.The annual Conference of CI and FENS will be held in Belgrade on June 19/20 and will gather around 300 organizations. A strong political statement will be published supporting democratic candidate that respects values of civil society. Three other declarations will deal with European integrations, Poverty and Citizen Participation. Good media coverage is expected and B92 will make detailed reports. In addition, appealing video clip and radio message are going to be broadcasted via B92 network.

EPUS is going to continue with a strong GOTV campaign under slogan: “Vote for Europe” in Belgrade and throughout Serbia by organizing public events regarding the accession of Serbia to the EU. EPUS will again make public call through press releases and public appearances in media directed towards the youngest voters to use their right to vote and determine their European future by their own will, not leaving this decision in the hands of others. In our assessment the GOTV effort will be crucial for the success of MrTadic.

EPUS will provide high publicity to the final phase in drafting national Resolution on the European integration as priority for Serbia (process we are facilitating in the Parliament), in order to indirectly support democratic candidate, as Radicals are the only political party not participating in this process.

Before the second round

The presidential race is entering its last phase. There is a growing support to Boris Tadic, namely almost all political parties and former presidential candidates publicly announced that they would endorse Tadic. Many public personalities, actors, artists, professional athletes also took part in Tadic's campaign. It looks more and more as a referendum on democratic future than presidential elections.

Mr. Tadic is promoting his plan on opening a Presidential Office for Citizens. His campaign is very stable and he is growing into a respected politician capable of leading Serbia into Europe.

At the same time the candidate Tomislav Nikolic is showing signs of nervousness and is radicalizing his campaign. Their main topic now is the issue of drugs (heroin) and weather 600kg were destroyed or sold by the state. Legia, the man indicted for killing the Prime Minister, raised this accusation on Djindjic's government. Today he called all women to vote for him announcing that he will call for complete demilitarization of the region (to save their sons from wars) and saying that Serbia will be the first to destroy all heavy weapons. At the same time he announced that he is against trade and relations with Croatia and Slovenia and that borders “of Great Serbia” from 19th century that include parts of Croatia and Bosnia are his dream and long term goal.

A common topic of both candidates is European integration of Serbia. Tadic sees Europe as a priority for Serbia and as continuation of Djindjic's political vision. He visited Brussels and met all top officials. Nikolic is manipulating the public by saying that Europe will accept the results of elections meaning accept him as a partner and that there will be no bad consequences if he becomes president.

At the fifth meeting of the Working Group of the Committee for European Integration of the Parliament of Serbia, on June 21, the draft of the Resolution on the European Integration has been adopted. It is expected that after consultations of the Speaker of the Parliament with parties' leaders and being approved subsequently by the MPs clubs of the parliamentary parties it will enter the parliamentary procedure and be adopted by September 2004. Consensus building on the European Integration in the Parliament of Serbia has already inspired wider debates on the same issue, promising wider social consensus to be achieved. The NGO sector unanimously supported parliamentary efforts passing common Declaration on European Integration.

Recent pools show an advantage of Tadic of more than 5% but a lot depends on the turnout of voters. In a case of extremely low turnout Nikolic would be in a better position. The first result estimations by CESID will be available around 9PM on Sunday 27. July (day of the elections) and official results around midnight.

NGO activities

NGOs are intensively continuing their GOTV campaign concentrating on areas identified by CESID and based on results from the first round.

The biggest event for NGOs was a two days conference “New Beginning” of FENS (Federation of NGOs of Serbia) and Civic Initiatives. More than 250 organizations sent their representatives. A great satisfaction was expressed with the contribution of NGOs to voters turn out in the first round of elections. Some participants said it revived their activism and feeling of being part of large group with a common goal: democratic Serbia.

The main discussion on the Conference was on three declarations: Declaration on Poverty reduction and role of NGOs, Declaration on youth participation (drafted by Students Unions) and Declaration on European integrations (Drafted by European Movement in Serbia). All three documents were thoroughly analyzed as priorities for the sector. They will be available in English after the elections.

The challenges of current political events were present in all discussions. A need for more pressure on Government for finally changing the NGO law and defining financial frame for the sector were set as priority activity of FENS. Creating a body for institutional relations between NGOs and State and a necessity of a Strategy for development of third sector were also enhanced.

As part of possibilities in the future European Agency for Reconstruction and Balkan Trust for Democracy announced their new programs.

Mr. Pavol Demes, Director for Central and Eastern Europe of the German Marshall Fund, gave an inspiring speech on importance of election participation sharing good and bad experiences from Slovakia. At the request of participants we invited both presidential candidates to come to the conference and

Communication on Serbia June 23, 2004 Weekly update prepared by Jelica Minic & Miljenko Dereta

No.5

present their policies towards NGOs and citizen participation and to answer to some questions from participants.

Tomislav Nikolic did not answer even after several reminders. When asked about it at his press conference he said he never got the invitation and even if he did he sees no reason to talk to NGOs. FENS issued a statement giving all details on (lack) of communication and finishing with “We are not surprised by his refusal of the dialogue and by the fact he did not say the truth.”

Boris Tadic accepted the invitation and spent one hour answering the questions. He stressed the need for continuous contacts with citizens, for necessity of NGO contribution to many areas where the state has no capacity and for his readiness to consult with NGOs and consider their projects for joint actions. All electronic media reported on his meeting with NGOs.

As an independent impression of a guest to the Conference we attach the text by Chuck Hirt from CEE Citizens Network.

Reflections from a guest at the FENS conference, 19-20, June 2004

I was invited by Civic Initiatives, the organizers of the FENS conference to attend this year. I knew of the formation of FENS from last year's origins and had heard stories of their activities but this was a chance to see it for real. The annual meeting of FENS was a most impressive event. The size of the delegation with over 250 participants was remarkable in itself and an indication of the interest in the NGO community to work together. The second striking thing upon entering the group was the diversity. This was noticeable in many respects, but particularly the participation of disabled and of youth.

After spending some more time with the group, it was clear that the diversity extended beyond this. The leadership of the group also reflected the geographic and ethnic makeup of the country. It was most impressive that they have been able to form such a large organization and that it operates in line with its values of reflecting the differences in the country. They “walk the talk”. It is important for the future of Serbia that such groups already exist and operate effectively.

The other significant aspect of the conference was the level of sophistication of their agenda. Their time together was not focused on the needs of the NGO sector but primarily on several important issues affecting the civil society in Serbia. They developed resolutions related to Poverty Reduction, Citizen Participation (especially youth) and on EU integration. Often when NGO leaders come together they are not as well focused. The inclusion of presentations on access to information and how technology can support their work were also impressive.

The invitation of the two Presidential candidates to their session also reflected the political sophistication of the group. They realize that there is a significant and yet non-partisan role. FENS is clear about their issues and realize the importance to engage candidates for political office to see where they stand in relationship with them. If this step is not taken, it is much more difficult to hold them accountable later. There is a realization of the need to ensure that people vote to express their opinion as well. The presence of one of the two candidates was confirmation of the importance of the work of FENS.

It was an honor to have been invited. It is clear that there is reason for hope in Serbia. NGO's are leading the way to help build a true civil society. FENS is most definitely a critical part of ensuring a better future.

Chuck HirtCEE Citizens Network

SERBIA FINALY HAS A PRESIDENT

A big sight of relief came out throughout Serbia in the evening of June 27, 2004: Serbia finally has a democratic president Mr. Boris Tadic. The importance of this election lies in the fact that the presidential mandate is 5 years and it is now a stable state institution that we have in Serbia. The institutional stability at that level will help bridging the period before local and between local and parliamentary elections and provide continuity of pro-European and democratic orientation in Serbia.

Mr. Boris Tadic, candidate of Democratic Party got 53.6% (1.664.500) votes and Mr. Tomislav Nikolic from the Radical Party 45.1% (1.402.360) votes.

The turnout was 48.29 % of electoral body. A higher percentage than in the first round was the first positive surprise. The undisputable and somehow unexpected difference of 245,036 votes in favor of Tadic is another reason for satisfaction. Citizens in Serbia voted in majority for a program focused on peace, tolerance, reforms and above all European values and European integration of Serbia & Montenegro. One must point out that the number of votes for Mr. Tadic doubled between two rounds. Having to choose between democracy and nationalistic populism, Serbian citizens opted for European future and not retrograde nationalistic propaganda.

The skeptics are warning that the number of votes for the Radical party is not to be underestimated. That is true. But it is also true that despite this large number they lost the elections although everybody considered them as favorites. After Milosevic went out of Serbian political life his policy, continued by the Radical and some other parties, was defeated once again. The extremely poor result of Socialist party in the first round confirms this. Further decline of the radical option in each respect could be expected in the near future. First signs of disorientation and panic can be seen among its leaders and among voters. They look at someone else as responsible for their defeat, be it the minorities' votes or “good weather that kept peasants on the fields”. They flirted with European integration and are now going back to their usual discourse, what becomes too confusing for their electorate.

We consider as very encouraging the high turnout of pro democratic voters. They are usually very passive but this time they very well felt the importance of these elections and acted in favor of the democratic future of Serbia. It is very important now to maintain their activism and to communicate regularly on election issues with the wider public. One of the comments by members of electoral commissions was that they were surprised by the large turnout of young people.

The first statements of President Tadic are very moderate and constructive, insisting on stability of the state and cooperation with the government. This is extremely important having in mind that the Governments' candidate Marsicanin threatened that cohabitation would generate chaos in the country. It seems that an agreement was reached that there will be no immediate extraordinary parliamentary elections. This will give time to all players at the political scene to reconsider their positions and to build new relations that will be more in the interest of Serbia and less in the interest of individual political parties and their leaders. If Kostunica and his party open the issue of reconstruction of the Government or extraordinary elections it will be a clearer sign of their will to destabilize Serbia and continue their conflict with the Democratic Party.

NGO CONTRIBUTION

NGOs had an intense GOTV campaign for the second round of elections. New target places were suggested by CESID concentrating this time on Belgrade (almost 30% of Serbian population) and Vojvodina. Half a million leaflets and posters were distributed door to door, ads in newspapers were published and appearances on different TV and radio programs were used for calling people to elections. A positive approach and optimistic messages were the tone of the NGOs communication to the citizens. First analysis of the results shows the evident impact of the GOTV campaign on the elections' results. The best evaluation of our efforts could be shown in figures: Serbia has 8,600 election sites. In our campaign we targeted around 1,500 election sites. The difference between Nikolic's and Tadic's final results was around 245,000 votes in favor of Tadic. On more than 1,500 sites that we targeted with our campaign the difference was 270,000 in favor of Tadic!According to Zoran Lucic from CESID: “… in case the increase of the number of voters who voted for Tadic had not happened in the second round, on the selected election sites, Nikolic would have won the elections… on approximately 7,000 election sites that were not selected for GOTV campaign, Nikolic won 25,199 votes more than Tadic did, and he did not win the elections because Tadic had an unbeatable advantage on the selected election sites”.

Results of the GOTV campaign are obvious in a number of towns and municipalities in province where for the first time after year 2000 citizens were motivated to express their democratic option

Communication on Serbia July 7, 2004 Weekly update prepared by Jelica Minic & Miljenko Dereta

No.6

again (examples with the turnout above 50%). Consequently, the democratic option prevailed in several cities where Radicals traditionally have had majority in previous elections (Lazarevac, Bor etc.).A complete report and analysis of the whole campaign is in preparation.

LESONS LEARNED

-Important and measurable results can be achieved in GOTV campaigns if they are based on a serious statistical research and analysis of previous election results. It proved that general campaigns which are not properly targeted are no more acceptable.-Important and measurable results can be achieved only if the campaign is run by a coalition of NGOs with precisely defined roles. In our case CESID was responsible for targeting, Civic Initiatives (using resources of Federation of NGOs of Serbia) and European Movement in Serbia with its branch offices were the “working bees” responsible for creating materials and actions and distributing materials. Complementary supportive activities were provided by Creative Youth of Novi Sad (SONS) and the women NGOs - the Voice of Difference and Women in Black.-As a result of previous conditions important and measurable results can be achieved with relatively modest but efficiently planed and spent budget-Even the smallest budget depends on donors that have deep understanding of local situation and its regional implications. It also depends on trust in local resources and partners. This trust inevitably results in quick action and flexible approach.-Such trust based efficient partnerships can be built only on a long term commitment to common values and goals. It is not a mere coincidence that the same donors, primarily German Marshal Fund and Freedom House supported the year 2000 campaign that overthrew Milosevic and this year presidential campaign. The NDI has long term cooperation with CESID. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund, that defined Serbia as its pivotal point in Europe, joined this year by supporting Federation of NGOs of Serbia (FENS) conference, held between two rounds of presidential campaign. Women's campaign was supported by Canadian Urgent Action Fund.-Foundations' and Funds' decisions depend on people like Greg Kennedy and Pavol Demes from GMF, Stephen Heintz and Bill Moody from RBF and Mike Staresinich from FH. All of them have been participating for years in the Serbian drama, always inspiring us by an objective point of view, by ideas and solutions that we “in the boiling pot” cannot see being directly involved. -We consider our success as a result of common endeavor of a coalition of local NGOs supported by old friends. We would especially like to stress a daily support and advice of Pavol Demes, whose invaluable experience proved to be a common asset of the whole region of the EU future members and new neighbors.

CONCLUSION

This campaign was very important for the NGOs in Serbia. The election of Mr. Tadic opens new perspective for the whole sector. The campaign was a revival of old energy, commitment and solidarity in the sector, reactivating those that after the year 2000 were at the verge of giving up. Success was something the sector needed and successful we were.