On Wednesday, September 21, the roundtable “Possibility of Introducing a Proportional Electoral System with Direct Candidate Voting in Serbia: Advantages and Disadvantages” was organized by the Foundation for Liberal Public Policy at the Miljenko Dereta Space in Belgrade.
Through this event, the Foundation launched a public advocacy campaign to reform the current electoral system, which is widely considered one of the worst in Europe. Its central flaws include the uneven representation of cities and municipalities in parliament, a total absence of MP accountability to voters, the weakening of parliament’s representative and oversight roles, and the reinforcement of centralist and authoritarian dynamics within political parties.
To address these shortcomings, the Foundation for Liberal Public Policy proposes introducing elements of personalization into the electoral system. Citizens must be enabled to directly elect the individual MPs who will represent them in parliament. Candidates should no longer hide behind party names and top leaders; instead, individual names must appear directly on the ballot. Rather than relying on unified party-wide lists, political parties (as well as coalitions and citizens’ groups) would nominate specific candidates in designated electoral units. This structure allows voters to select among local candidates whose backgrounds, qualifications, and track records are familiar to them.
The discussion was opened by Assistant Professor Dr. Dušan Vučićević from the Faculty of Political Sciences, a long-time advocate for electoral reform in both public and academic arenas. He outlined the core mechanics of a proportional system with direct candidate voting, including the division of the country into electoral units and single-member districts, direct voting for party-nominated candidates within each district, a proportional method for converting votes into seats, and the allocation of mandates to candidates achieving the strongest local results. In the second part of his presentation, Dr. Vučićević analyzed the Slovenian electoral system as a case study, detailing its drawbacks while offering adjustments tailored to the Serbian context.
Danijel Dašić from the National Coalition for Decentralization (NKD) emphasized that adopting this model would significantly enhance the geographical representation of parliament and lay the groundwork for meaningful decentralization: “Any electoral reform must ensure that people living outside Belgrade feel a tangible sense of influence. Personalizing the electoral system would be a major step in that direction.”
The systemic geographic disparity remains evident following the April 2022 elections. In the current parliamentary convocation, 102 out of 174 cities and municipalities in Serbia have no representative, while 105 MPs (42%) reside in Belgrade. Conversely, the model proposed by the Foundation for Liberal Public Policy ensures equitable territorial representation proportional to population. This is achieved by introducing multiple electoral units covering defined regions, each returning a number of MPs reflecting its population size.
Ivo Čolović, Program Director at the Centre for Free Elections and Democracy (CeSID), addressed how potential electoral reform could rebuild the connection between voters and representatives: “In the proposed electoral system, citizens will know that the MP they vote for comes from their specific electoral unit and is meant to represent their interests. It will be much easier for citizens to reach out, apply pressure, or hold them accountable if they act against local interests. When an MP maintains a direct connection with voters, they will exercise much greater caution in parliamentary decision-making, as they can no longer hide behind the authority of a party leader. Representatives will have to demonstrate their performance directly to those who voted for them, meaning they will not become lifelong MPs retiring in parliament, but will instead be held accountable at the next election. Today, closed party lists prevent accountability because voters do not know who or how to penalize.”
Čolović noted that structural changes in party and parliamentary operations would become fully evident after two or three election cycles through the emergence of a genuine “electoral political elite.” Advancement within political parties would no longer depend on a single leader who systematically removes capable rivals, but rather on popular legitimacy earned directly from voters. Expected outcomes include internal democratization, party decentralization, and the cultivation of far more competent leadership for both parties and state governance.
Highlighting findings from CeSID’s research, Čolović shared public opinion data on the current electoral framework: “51% of citizens believe the present system fails to reflect the true will of voters, while 70% decide how to vote solely based on party leaders without knowing the individual candidates on the list. Most importantly, 74% of citizens support introducing a system that allows them to directly vote for individual parliamentary and municipal representatives.”
Assistant Professor Dr. Jelena Lončar from the Faculty of Political Sciences agreed that personalization addresses the core flaws of the current setup. She noted that a proportional system with direct candidate voting would enhance the quality of national minority representation, as regions predominantly inhabited by minorities would secure adequate representation through designated electoral units. “Establishing multiple electoral units would also incentivize majority parties to engage more directly and collaborate with minority parties, which rarely happens today,” Lončar observed.
Addressing the position of underrepresented genders, Lončar addressed the fact that the Slovenian model—presented as the closest precedent—lacks affirmative action measures for women. She argued that maintaining gender quotas of at least 40% in parliament must remain mandatory in Serbia, with quotas integrated directly into candidate nomination and seat allocation procedures.
Associate Professor Dr. Dušan Spasojević from the Faculty of Political Sciences supported the proposal as a practical step toward incremental improvement, though he cautioned that positive effects would not occur overnight or automatically: “Even in countries with centuries-old majoritarian systems, such as the US and the UK, party identification remains exceptionally strong. Voting behavior is heavily driven by attitudes toward party leaders and platforms, meaning local candidates do not always play the primary role.”Spasojević also raised the challenge of Kosovo and Metohija, specifically how to integrate this territory into the framework of electoral units and districts.
Pavle Grbović, President of the Free Citizens’ Movement (PSG), stated that his organization adopted a Program for the Reform of Political Institutions last year, which includes transitioning to a personalized proportional system. Grbović explained: “The Movement did not develop and advocate for this program out of an expectation of immediate gains or instant results, nor do we harbor illusions about achieving qualitative electoral reform within the current political climate. The provisions of this program will be implemented when PSG forms part of the government alongside coalition partners, deliberately granting citizens greater power to monitor and hold us accountable.”
The “Ne davimo Beograd” movement was represented by Biljana Đorđević, MP and member of the Green-Left parliamentary group. She described the proposed model as the most viable among those debated in professional circles in recent years, highlighting how it encourages decentralization and allows local and regional initiatives without a nationwide footprint to enter parliament. However, she emphasized that for green-left actors globally, electoral reform is not a primary objective and does not inherently guarantee democratization. For “Ne davimo Beograd,” true transformation relies on strengthening participatory democracy mechanisms and democratizing internal political organizations.
Dr. Irena Fiket, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, offered a distinct perspective, arguing that electoral system reform has limited reach unless accompanied by direct channels for citizen participation in decision-making. She outlined several participatory and deliberative mechanisms, including Citizens’ Assemblies.
The second half of the event featured an interactive discussion with the audience covering alternative models, ranging from fully majoritarian frameworks to open-list proportional systems. The panel concluded with a consensus on the urgent necessity of electoral reform and its long-term potential to revitalize political and civic life.
Dr. Dušan Vučićević summarized this consensus: “Few institutional reforms yield visible results within a short timeframe. Electoral reform is one of them because the design of electoral rules directly determines the overall legitimacy of the system, the level of political inclusion across societal groups, and the resolution of social conflicts.”