On the night of 25 October, tens of thousands filled the streets of Belgrade and other cities, as they’d so often done in protest over the past two years. But this time they came out to celebrate. In that day’s National Assembly election, Student List, a slate of political newcomers, defeated Aleksandar Vučić’s Serbian Progressive Party (SNS). The SNS had been in power since 2012 and Vučić had dominated Serbian politics ever since. The student-led movement behind the protests, which rose up against corruption, has ousted an autocrat and given Serbia the opportunity for a democratic reset.

From grief to protest

Vučić was prime minister from 2014 to 2017 and president from 2017. Under his rule, Serbia became steadily more autocratic. Public institutions served ruling-party interests amid a web of corruption, patronage, coercion and impunity, and public media became a ruling-party mouthpiece.

Civic freedoms deteriorated dramatically. In 2018, the CIVICUS Monitor, our research partnership that tracks civic space conditions around the world, rated Serbia’s civic space as narrowed, meaning that fundamental rights were broadly respected. By the end of Vučić’s rule, the rating had collapsed to repressed, meaning that criticising those in power carried severe risks. The state used violence against protests and put heavy pressure on independent media. It treated civil society as a security threat, targeting it with spyware and other forms of surveillance and subjecting organisations to raids and police investigations.

As conditions deteriorated, Serbia saw waves of protest, including environmental mobilisations against unaccountable and destructive large-scale projects and protests triggered by mass shootings and an attack on an opposition leader. But the seismic shift began in November 2024 with the collapse of a railway station canopy in Novi Sad, Serbia’s second-largest city. Sixteen people died. The government insisted it was a tragic accident, but the station had only recently been renovated and, with construction contracts shrouded in secrecy, many suspected corners had been cut. For protesters, this was a lethal symbol of the costs of corruption, negligence and impunity. No one has been held accountable.

Students refused to let the tragedy lie. They held vigils and mass protests on a scale unseen since 2000, when demonstrations in which students played a prominent role ousted Slobodan Milošević, the infamous authoritarian leader and accused war criminal. This time, their most effective tactic was a months-long education strike in which they blockaded and occupied universities.

The protest movement benefited from the generally positive image the Serbian public has of students. As it grew, it connected with existing groups, including environmental and legal aid organisations, independent media and, crucially, academics, university administrators and education unions, who took solidarity strike action. Unlike previous protests, this movement built wider public support, backed by a ‘students in every village’ campaign that saw students meet with rural communities to ask what mattered most to them.

State attempts to suppress the movement failed. These included mass arrests, violence by security forces and gangs of ruling-party supporters, intimidation, threats against journalists covering protests and an extensive campaign of disinformation and smears. Vučić vilified protesters as agents of foreign powers bent on subversion while pardoning people accused of violence against them, and authorities failed to investigate abuses. The government fired education-sector employees for taking part in strikes.

Change on the cards

Ultimately, the protests forced Vučić’s hand. Constitutionally barred from seeking a third term as president, in June he announced an early parliamentary election, and in September stood down as president, making clear his intention to hold on to power as prime minister. He presumably gambled that a skewed playing field, characterised by intimidation and biased coverage, would let him win again and unleash an even fiercer crackdown.

The gamble failed because of the movement’s discipline and the smart choices it made. Throughout, students resisted opposition parties’ attempts to co-opt them, insisting that deeper change was needed to re-establish civic freedoms and the rule of law, free public institutions from political capture and tackle corruption. From its early days, the movement practised internal democracy, debating, learning and taking decisions in university plenums. When it decided to field a slate of candidates, it used the same method to select them. Students didn’t put themselves forward, choosing instead public figures untainted by association with established politics and likely to command broad support. Those set to take seats include academics, actors, former sports stars, medical professionals and musicians.

The election became a referendum on Vučić and the SNS. During the campaign, independent media published several stories exposing corruption, including leaked messages allegedly exchanged between Vučić and criminal gang members. They reported on a whistleblower who said he was paid to supply people to instigate violence at protests so the government could blame protesters.

The appetite for change was evident on election day, as lines formed at polling stations. Turnout, at around 69 per cent, was high by Serbian standards, over 10 percentage points up on the previous election in 2023.

The result surpassed all predictions. According to projections based on the preliminary count, Student List has around 53 per cent of the vote, which would give it a clear majority of 141 of the National Assembly’s 250 seats. The SNS-led bloc trails on around 39 per cent. While final official results are expected in early November, the margin of victory was such that Vučić had to concede quickly. However, he was far from gracious in doing so, alleging without evidence that Student List had been backed by European governments and US ‘deep state’ interests opposed to Donald Trump.

Apart from Student List and the SNS-led bloc, the only parties to win seats represent Serbia’s ethnic minorities. The Socialist Party, Milošević’s party and a longstanding SNS partner, fell below the three per cent threshold and crashed out of parliament for the first time. Some opposition parties withdrew to avoid splitting the Student List vote, while those that stood won no seats.

The challenges of power

After the euphoria comes the challenge of moving from protest to power. A movement that has refused to have formal leaders must now unite behind a prime minister. Once the National Assembly convenes, Student List will have 90 days to form a government. Its deliberately broad campaign focused on major questions of national renewal but offered little detail. This strategy papered over political differences among representatives who range from nationalist to more liberal, and these differences can be expected to surface if the incoming government succeeds in restoring the space for normal political debate. There’s also the question of how those elected will relate to the student movement.

As in Hungary, where longstanding autocratic leader Viktor Orbán finally fell to electoral defeat in April, the new government will face the difficult task of reorienting state institutions that have been filled with SNS supporters and bent to the party’s interests. An early sign of change came when the public broadcaster apologised to viewers for its bias towards the former ruling party, something that also happened in Hungary. The government will need to repay voters’ faith by rooting out corruption, which will mean overhauling institutions including the judiciary and police. All this will unfold alongside a presidential election that’s due by the end of the year.

The outside world will be watching for foreign policy changes. Vučić pursued a non-aligned policy, balancing between China, Russia and the European Union (EU). Relations with Russia reflected deep historical, cultural and religious ties, while China made Serbia its strategic partner in Central and Eastern Europe, with the two countries backing each other politically. China invested in infrastructure such as bridges, power plants and railways, including the disastrous reconstruction of Novi Sad’s station. At the same time, Vučić maintained an official goal of joining the EU and offered it key partnerships, such as a controversial 2024 deal to supply lithium for batteries, despite mass protests that had halted a planned lithium mine in 2022. EU states faced criticism for not doing enough to stand up to Vučić. More recently, Vučić cultivated ties with Trump, expediting approval for a project to build a Trump tower on the symbolically important site of a former army headquarters bombed by NATO in 1999, before the project was withdrawn amid a corruption probe.

Student List has said little on foreign policy but has made clear it will maintain Vučić’s refusal to impose sanctions on Russia. Relations with Kosovo, which unilaterally declared independence in 2008, are likely to see little change. One shift could come in relations with Israel, as the student movement has consistently expressed solidarity with Palestine and called out genocide. A referendum on EU membership may be on the cards at some point, and the EU should seize the opportunity to deepen its engagement by supporting efforts to tackle corruption and rebuild respect for the rule of law and civic space.

Challenges lie ahead, but a population that has rediscovered the power of collective action can face them with confidence. Serbia is also a vital source of international inspiration. Together with Hungary’s example, it shows there’s nothing permanent about autocratic rule. The world’s many Gen Z-led movements that have self-organised to demand a fairer distribution of economic and political power, and civil society more broadly, can take heart. Serbia has shown that organising and protesting works, and change is possible.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org