Statement by the President of the Council of the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media

Since the constitution of the new composition of the Council, serious claims have been made in public regarding irregularities in the Regulator's work, as well as external influence on individual Council members and the existence of orders allegedly determining the outcome of voting. Allegations of irregularities in the Regulator's work or influence on the independence of its members require a foundation in verifiable facts and, where grounds exist, consideration within the appropriate institutional procedure.

Regarding the letter sent by four members of the Council of the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media to representatives of international institutions and diplomatic missions, I consider it important that the public has access to complete information regarding the actions of the new composition of the Council and the circumstances under which the expansion of election campaign monitoring was discussed.

The monitoring of the election campaign began on 10 September, prior to the constitution of the new composition of the Council, according to the existing methodology and on a sample of 11 media service providers. Following the constitution of the Council, the issue of a possible expansion of the sample was raised.

Before deciding on the expansion of monitoring, an assessment of the feasibility of expanding the existing sample was requested from the REM technical service. 

Based on the Monitoring and Analysis Service Report No. 1154/26 and new requests submitted on 26 September 2026 for the monitoring of the public service broadcaster of a national minority, a conclusion was reached by some of the members of the Council of the Regulatory Authority that in this election cycle, conditions do not exist for expanding the list of media service providers subject to continuous monitoring. The Monitoring and Analysis Service assessed that with the available human and technical capacities, it is not possible to include additional programmes without risking the implementation of the already initiated monitoring of 11 programmes.

At the first extraordinary session of the new composition of the Council, held on 28 September, the draft decision on expanding monitoring failed to secure the necessary majority, so the decision was not adopted.

Different views among Council members on individual issues are an integral part of the work of a collegial body. Proposals are decided upon by voting, in accordance with the law and the Rules of Procedure, and the fact that a particular proposal failed to secure the necessary majority represents an outcome of that decision-making process.

Public debate and criticism of the Regulator's work are a legitimate part of a democratic society. At the same time, independence in decision-making implies that each Council member can form their own position without political or other external influence, in accordance with the law and prescribed procedures, based on available facts and expert assessments. Public debate and criticism must not restrict that independence nor create the expectation that the outcome of an independent regulatory body's decision must be predetermined. This principle applies equally to all Council members and to every decision the Council makes.

Continuous monitoring is one of the instruments used by the Regulator to monitor media reporting during an election campaign.

The scope of the monitoring sample does not determine the extent of the Regulator's jurisdiction over individual media service providers. 

Acting upon complaints, acting ex officio, and other statutory forms of oversight are applied independently of whether a specific media service provider is included in the continuous monitoring sample.

The jurisdiction of the Regulator in the electoral process relates to statutory obligations in the field of electronic media. The evaluation of the electoral process as a whole encompasses a significantly broader range of facts and circumstances. The views of individual Council members on the conditions for holding free and fair elections represent their own positions and do not constitute a position or decision of the REM Council.

The new composition of the Council is only now beginning its regular work. Following the constituent sessions and the first extraordinary electronic session, the first regular session of the new composition of the Council will be scheduled for Tuesday, 6 October 2026. Issues falling within the Regulator's jurisdiction will be considered at that session in accordance with the law and the Rules of Procedure.

As President of the Council, I will ensure the conditions for the regular operation of the Council, the transparency of its work, and respect for the independence of each of its members. The independence of the Regulator requires consistent compliance with the law and prescribed procedures, equal standards towards all media service providers, and institutional consideration of every issue within the Regulator's jurisdiction.

Stevica Smederevac

President of the Council
Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media