This information is derived from the State Department's Office of Investment Affairs, Investment Climate Statement. Any questions on the ICS can be directed to EB-ICS-DL@state.gov
Last Published: 2/26/2018

Surveys show that corruption in Serbia is believed to be pervasive, but it is difficult to quantify. In Transparency International’s 2016 Corruption Perception Index (CPI), Serbia ranked 72 of 176 compared countries, nearly unchanged from its ranking of 71 in 2015. In its 2016 progress report on Serbia, the EU said corruption remained a serious problem, and anti-corruption efforts had yet to yield meaningful results.

Some U.S. firms have identified corruption as an obstacle to foreign direct investment in Serbia. Corruption appears most pervasive in cases involving public procurement, natural resource extraction, government-owned property, and political influence/pressure on the judiciary and prosecutors.

Serbia is a signatory to the Council of Europe's Civil Law Convention on Corruption and has ratified the Council’s Criminal Law Convention on Corruption, the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, and the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. Serbia also is a member of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), a peer-monitoring organization that provides peer-based assessments of members’ anti-corruption efforts on a continuing basis.

The Serbian government has worked to bring its legal framework for combating corruption more in line with EU norms, and a dedicated state body – the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) – oversees efforts in this area. The Criminal Code specifies a large number of potential offenses that can be used to prosecute corruption and economic offenses, including but not limited to giving or accepting a bribe, abuse of office, abuse of a monopoly, misfeasance in public procurement, abuse of economic authority, fraud in service, and embezzlement.

In November 2016, Serbia’s National Assembly amended the law to establish specialized anti-corruption prosecution units and judicial courts, mandate the use of task forces, and introduce liaison officers and financial forensic experts.

In 2015, there were 1,876 judgments in cases with an element of corruption, of which 71 percent resulted in conviction. However, there have been allegations that, in some cases, criminal law was being applied in a discriminatory manner. While Serbia has begun to establish a track record in low-level corruption convictions, the EU noted in its 2016 progress report that there are still very few convictions for high-level corruption.

In 2015, 2016, and early 2017 there were a series of large scale arrests of former officials and government employees on allegations of corruption and abuse of position. In total, these actions resulted in the arrest of over 150 people. To date the arrests have resulted in approximately 40 criminal complaints, but none of the cases has concluded in either conviction or acquittal.

The law requires income and asset disclosure by appointed or elected officials. The disclosures cover assets of the officials, spouses, and dependent children. Declarations are publicly available on the ACA website and failures to file or to fully disclose income and assets are subject to administrative and/or criminal sanctions. Significant changes to assets or income must be reported annually, upon departure from office, and for a period of two years after separation. During the past year the ACA initiated 123 requests for misdemeanor proceedings related to asset disclosures and 15 criminal reports to prosecutors based on the suspicion that public officials did not disclose assets or gave false information with the intent to conceal the status of their assets. The agency also filed 19 reports to prosecutors and other state organs based on evidence of possible criminal offenses (e.g. bribes, tax evasion or money laundering) as revealed in the disclosure forms.

Serbian authorities do not require private companies to establish internal codes of conduct related to corruption or other matters, but some professional associations – e.g. for attorneys, engineers and doctors – enforce codes of conduct for their members. Private companies often have internal controls, ethics, or compliance programs designed to detect and prevent bribery of government officials. Large companies often have elaborate internal programs, especially in industries such as tobacco, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and industries regularly involved in public procurement.

Serbia also enacted its first Whistleblower Protection Law in June 2015, under which individuals can report corruption in companies and government agencies, and receive court protection from retaliation by their employers for doing so. In June 2016, the Higher Court in Novi Sad ruled in favor of a whistleblower who reported malfeasance in the local government. The court ruled that the whistleblower should be allowed to return to his workplace and be compensated financially.

The Regional Anti-Corruption Initiative maintains a website with updates about anti-corruption efforts in Serbia.

Resources to Report Corruption

Serbian Anti-Corruption Agency
Carice Milice 1, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
+381 (0) 11 4149 100
office@acas.rs

Transparency International Serbia
Transparentnost Serbia
Palmoticeva 27, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
+381 (0) 11 303 38 27
ts@transparentnost.org.rs

 

Prepared by our U.S. Embassies abroad. With its network of 108 offices across the United States and in more than 75 countries, the U.S. Commercial Service of the U.S. Department of Commerce utilizes its global presence and international marketing expertise to help U.S. companies sell their products and services worldwide. Locate the U.S. Commercial Service trade specialist in the U.S. nearest you by visiting http://export.gov/usoffices.