Serbia Results Report 2020-2022

Serbia’s fourth Open Government PartnershipThe Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a multi-stakeholder initiative focused on improving government transparency, ensuring opportunities for citizen participation in public matters, and strengthen... More (OGP) action planAction plans are at the core of a government’s participation in OGP. They are the product of a co-creation process in which government and civil society jointly develop commitments to open governmen... focused on digitalization and public participationGiving citizens opportunities to provide input into government decision-making leads to more effective governance, improved public service delivery, and more equitable outcomes. Technical specificatio... in decision-making. Half of the commitments were either fully or substantially completed, but only one (simplifying administrative procedures) saw major results in opening government. To improve future action plans, the government could involve high-level public officials and take a strategic approach to reforms that require legislative changes.

Early ResultsEarly results refer to concrete changes in government practice related to transparency, citizen participation, and/or public accountability as a result of a commitment’s implementation. OGP’s Inde... More

Serbia’s fourth action plan (2020-2022) carried over several policy areas from previous action plans, including access to information, civic participation, environment and climateIn the face of intensifying climate change, OGP participating governments are using their action plans to increase transparency of environment-related information, ensure public oversight of climate f... More, public procurementTransparency in the procurement process can help combat corruption and waste that plagues a significant portion of public procurement budgets globally. Technical specifications: Commitments that aim t... More, and public service deliveryTo ensure that citizens of all groups are better supported by the government, OGP participating governments are working to improve the quality of and access to public services. Commitments in this are... More.

The IRM has assessed one commitment (Commitment 6) as having major early results, with four achieving marginal early results, including the three commitments identified as promising in the IRM Action Plan Review (Commitments 2, 3, and 7).[1] This was similar to the third action plan (2018-2020), where one out of 14 commitments had major early results. Notably, in both action plans, the work on simplifying administrative procedures for citizens and businesses achieved major early results. In the fourth action plan, CommitmentOGP commitments are promises for reform co-created by governments and civil society and submitted as part of an action plan. Commitments typically include a description of the problem, concrete action... 6 resulted in the establishment of a public register of administrative procedures and a single platform with all information on procedures and services.

CompletionImplementers must follow through on their commitments for them to achieve impact. For each commitment, OGP’s Independent Reporting Mechanism (IRM) evaluates the degree to which the activities outlin... More

Out of the 12 commitments, six were substantially or fully implemented. The remaining six saw limited implementation. This was similar to the third action plan, where seven out of 15 commitments were fully or substantially completed.[2] Some commitments saw high levels of implementation because the government prioritized them, such as the eConsultation portal (Commitments 2 and 3) and ePaper portal (Commitment 6). On the other hand, the general elections in 2020 and 2022 limited progress for other commitments. For example, the commitments on media co-funding and participation in determining topics of public interest (Commitments 11 and 12 respectively) involved adopting legislative proposals. This proved challenging during the long period with a caretaker government after the general elections. Moreover, the Serbian authorities lacked the capacity to produce the online platform for monitoring the funding of media projects.[3] Commitment 7 on combating violence against children (proposed by the Association of Lawyers AEPA) was identified as a promising commitmentThrough the Action Plan Review, OGP’s Independent Reporting Mechanism (IRM) recognizes promising commitments that address a policy area that is important to stakeholders or the national context. Pro... in the IRM Action Plan Review but saw only limited completion. The key outcome – online reporting and monitoring of the violence involving children – was not finished.

Participation and Co-Creation

The Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government (MPALSG)’s coordination during the fourth action plan improved compared to previous cycles. For example, the MPALSG included civil society stakeholders outside the OGP working group in discussions on relevant topics during the co-creation and implementation periods. The MPALSG organized five meetings of the working group and six meetings of the core group[4] during the co-creation process.[5] As in past action plans, public institutions had final veto over the proposals related to their jurisdictions. As a result, civil society participants found that the interventions from public institutions often changed the substance of the proposals and reduced the level of ambitionAccording to OGP’s Articles of Governance, OGP commitments should “stretch government practice beyond its current baseline with respect to key areas of open government.” Ambition captures the po... of commitments. Moreover, high-level political representatives (i.e., ministers) were insufficiently informed about their ministries’ role in the OGP process, which negatively impacted implementation of some commitments.

Implementation in context

The implementation of the fourth action plan coincided with two rounds of parliamentary electionsImproving transparency in elections and maintaining the independence of electoral commissions is vital for promoting trust in the electoral system, preventing electoral fraud, and upholding the democr... More (in 2020 and 2022) followed by prolonged processes to form the governments. Elections directly affected the implementation of Commitment 5, as no changes could be made to the Unified Voters Register during the election period. Organizational (administrative) changes that followed the formation of new governments also delayed certain commitments. Notably, the elections impacted Commitments 11 and 12, as the planned laws were not adopted. The COVID-19 pandemic also impacted implementation in 2020, as institutions were closed at first and later worked remotely. Commitment 10 was delayed, as the Office for Information Technologies and eGovernment prioritized data collection connected to the pandemic.

[1] Open Government Partnership, Serbia Action Plan Review 2020-2022, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/serbia-action-plan-review-2020-2022/

[2] Open Government Partnership, Serbia Transitional Results Report 2018-2020, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/serbia-transitional-results-report-2018-2020/.

[3] Based on the insights from representatives of the Ministry of Culture and Information, interview by the IRM, 28 October 2022.

[4] The core group is comprised of the commitment proposers and representatives of institutions.

[5] Minutes of all meetings available in the country repository, https://ekonsultacije.gov.rs/ogpPage/1