Serbia: documented application of the same framework
Academic research base
How are unions and professional associations brought under control or divided?
The government can control trade unions and professional associations by once giving preferential access to negotiations, money and media, offering its leaders functions, and making it difficult for competing organizations to register, space or contact members. This leaves employees and experts divided, while the representative who depends on the government transfers pressure downwards and mitigates demands upwards.
Control can also be subtle: management formally remains elected, but knows that an open conflict would endanger members or benefits. Cooperation with the state is a normal part of the work of trade unions and professions, so in itself it is not a proof of capture. The problem exists when an organization cannot freely choose leaders and attitude, when the benefit depends on obedience and when the government helps one representative to remove or weaken competition.
A trade union or professional association can protect members only if the management is not dependent on the employer and if people can join and strike without fear. In Serbia, influence is exercised through close leadership, privileged status of a representative trade union, pressure on employees and the creation of several competing organizations that are difficult to negotiate together. Protests by educators and universities have also shown the opposite possibility: professional networks can become a factor.
How the finding is separated in the matrix
Reports on human rights and civic space are under pressure on employees and trade union organization, while monitoring the 2024-2025 crisis documents the mobilization of educational and professional communities.
Control does not require the abolition of unions; it is enough to make a loyal organization the only interlocutor, and to divide, financially exhaust or separate from the membership.
Partly pressures and division are documented, but trade unions and professions in Serbia have a very different degree of independence.
Conflict between trade unions can arise from real programming differences, and the state legitimately regulates representativeness. Political control requires evidence of unequal rule, retaliation or direct personnel ties.
Cooperation with the state is not in itself a proof of control. It should be shown that the organization has lost the right to decide, received special benefit or helped to eliminate competition.
Works supporting this answer, with their evidence type and an explanation of how they relate to the claim.
comparing several countries or cases
Kim, W. i Gandhi, J. (2010), „Coopting Workers under Dictatorship“, Journal of Politics 72(3): 646–658.
- Contribution to this answer
- Kim and Gandhi show why authoritarian governments do not have to be just enemies: through parties and other regime institutions, the government can offer material benefits to workers in exchange for political peace. In more institutionalized dictatorships, workers really get more benefits, and workers’ protests are less.
Explain how the system works
Robertson, G. B. (2007), „Strikes and Labor Organization in Hybrid Regimes“, American Political Science Review 101(4): 781–798.
- Contribution to this answer
- Robertson shows what happens when unions exist, but they are not independent organizations of workers: in post-communist Russia, the protest depends less on the union organization, and more on whether it is supported by a part of the political elite or whether the economic conditions have become extremely difficult. The controlled union therefore changes the way workers’ discontent can become political pressure.
research in universities
Yan, X. (2014), „Engineering Stability: Authoritarian Political Control over University Students in Post-Deng China“, China Quarterly 218: 493–513.
- Contribution to this answer
- Yan shows how the authoritarian government organizes and supervises another potentially important collective actor students through institutions within the university. The mechanism of control of organized collective action is relevant, but the work is not about trade unions or professional associations.
review more research
Toepler, S., Zimmer, A., Fröhlich, C. i Obuch, K. (2020), „The Changing Space for NGOs: Civil Society in Authoritarian and Hybrid Regimes“, VOLUNTAS 31: 649–662.
- Contribution to this answer
- Toepler and co-authors demonstrate the general logic of selective treatment of organizations: politically demanding groups may be limited, while others engage in cooperation and provision of services. This helps to understand the co-optation of organizations, but is not a specific study of trade unions or professional associations.
comparing several countries or cases
Schleutker, E. (2021), „Co-optation and Repression of Religion in Authoritarian Regimes“, Politics and Religion 14(2): 209–240.
- Contribution to this answer
- Schleutker shows the same choice between co-optation and repression on religious communities. It is a useful comparative mechanism the regime can offer institutional access and benefit to one organized group and limit the other but it is not evidence of workers’ or professional organizations.
Sources supporting the Serbia example, with the claim they support and their limitations.
Domestic NGOs annual monitoring of human rights - Verified 21.08.2026
Beogradski centar za ljudska prava. 2026. Human Rights in Serbia 2025. Urednik Dušan Pokuševski. Beograd: Beogradski centar za ljudska prava.
Belgrade Centre for Human Rights. 2026. Human Rights in Serbia 2025. Editor Dušan Pokuševski. Belgrade: Belgrade Centre for Human Rights.
- What the source records
- The twenty-eighth annual report documents systemic pressures and violations of rights in 2025 and brings together data from institutions and sectoral organisations on the prosecution of protest participants and incidents towards journalists.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that trade union and professional autonomy are weakened by pressure, division and privileged interlocutors, but also that professional networks can resist.
- Source limitation
- The report follows the rights and institutional treatment, not the type of regime; part of the numerical data is taken from state authorities and other organizations and should be read with their original records.
Domestic NGO monitoring of civic space - Verified 21.08.2026
Građanske inicijative. 2025. Udruženja građana — sužavanje prostora za delovanje 2024. Beograd: Građanske inicijative.
Civic Initiatives. 2025. Citizens’ Associations narrowing the space for action 2024. Belgrade: Civic Initiatives.
- What the source records
- Based on the standardized regional matrix and bi-weekly reports, 234 cases of violations of fundamental rights and freedoms were registered, with an increase in physical and verbal attacks and other pressures compared to the previous year.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that trade union and professional autonomy are weakened by pressure, division and privileged interlocutors, but also that professional networks can resist.
- Source limitation
- The records include documented and reported cases, and not a representative rate of all incidents in Serbia, while the organization at the same time has a clear role of protecting the civil space.
Domestic NGOs analysis of the political crisis - Verified 21.08.2026
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy. 2025. Political and Institutional Crisis in Serbia: Possible Scenarios. Belgrade: BCSP.
- What the source records
- The analysis describes mass mobilization and growing repression, but concludes that the size of the protests does not alone address the issue of organization, choice and division within the government.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that trade union and professional autonomy are weakened by pressure, division and privileged interlocutors, but also that professional networks can resist.
- Source limitation
- Scenario analysis is time-sensitive and does not predict the future; it is based on information available until November 2025.
Official international monitoring - Verified 21.08.2026
European Commission. 2025. Serbia 2025 Report. Commission Staff Working Document. Brussels: European Commission.
- What the source records
- The report notes weak election conditions, limited parliamentary scrutiny, strong political pressure on the judiciary and concerns that the president is in practice directing decision-making beyond the constitutional idea.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that trade union and professional autonomy are weakened by pressure, division and privileged interlocutors, but also that professional networks can resist.
- Source limitation
- The report is related to the EU accession process and describes a certain period; it does not represent a scientific causal study or a uniform assessment of the type of regime.
Is a relevant source missing? Send it to us.
Suggest a source or report an error in this answer →