UNS submitted an Objection to the actions of the Culture and Information Committee in the process of determining the list of candidates for members of the REM Council

The Association of Journalists of Serbia (UNS) today submitted a complaint to the Parliamentary Committee for Culture and Information regarding the actions of this committee in the process of determining the list of candidates for members of the Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media (REM).

In its complaint, UNS pointed out the illegal actions of the Parliamentary Committee for Culture and Information and the violation of the Law on Electronic Media (ZEM) in the process of determining the list of authorized proposers and the list of candidates for the election of members of the REM Council.

“The Parliamentary Committee for Culture and Information is responsible for announcing and publishing a public call, assessing the timeliness of incoming proposals, and determining the fulfillment of legal conditions (for both proposed candidates and authorized proposers) and establishing the final proposal of all candidates, which it publishes on the website of the National Assembly,” UNS reminded the Committee at the beginning of the complaint.

The concept of electronic media and experience in the field of electronic media

UNS emphasized that the provisions of Article 4, paragraph 1, point 6 of the Law on Electronic Media define that an electronic medium is a program, that is, the entire programming content of radio and television, as well as programming content available on demand via electronic communication networks, which means that, according to ZEM, the law does not recognize portals as electronic media.

“The Committee does not make a clear distinction between electronic media in the sense of Article 4 of the Law on Electronic Media (television, radio, media services on demand) and the concept of media in the sense of the provisions of Article 35, paragraph 2 of the Law on Public Information and Media, which particularly includes daily and periodic newspapers, news agency services, radio programs, television programs, and electronic editions of those media, as well as independent electronic editions (editorially designed websites),” UNS stated.

As further noted in the UNS complaint, the provisions of Article 10, paragraph 3, points 2 and 3 of the Law on Electronic Media specify the conditions that candidates for members of the REM Council must meet, including experience in the field of electronic media.

Thus, UNS wrote, journalists, editors, and experts (lawyers, political scientists, communication specialists, sociologists) must have ten years of experience in the field of electronic media (television, radio, media services on demand); therefore, candidates who do not meet this requirement cannot be candidates for members of the REM Council.

“In the biographies of some candidates, it is evident that they do not possess experience, especially not ten years, in the field of electronic media, and such candidacies cannot and must not be accepted,” emphasized UNS in the complaint.

Conflict of interest

In its complaint to the Parliamentary Committee for Culture and Information, UNS stated that Article 15 of ZEM specifies that a member of the Council cannot be a person who is an owner or shareholder of a media service provider, a shareholder, a member of management bodies and other bodies, an employee, a contracted person, or a person who has an interest.

In the second paragraph, UNS wrote that a candidate must provide a written statement to the authorized proposer that there are no impediments to their election as determined by this article.

“Therefore, before authorized proposers suggest candidates for members of the REM Council, the candidate provides a written statement under full material and criminal responsibility declaring that they are not an owner, a shareholder of a media service provider, nor a shareholder, a member of a body, an employee, a contracted person, or a person who has a legal interest in legal entities engaged in the production, distribution, or broadcasting of radio and television programs or related activities,” UNS emphasized in the complaint.

As stated, “the fulfillment of this condition, that is, the absence of these impediments is assessed at the moment the candidate provides the statement to the authorized proposer which is submitted to the Committee of the National Assembly responsible for information.”

UNS also reminded the Committee for Culture and Information that point 6 of the Public Call for Proposing Candidates for Election to the REM Council, published in the “Official Gazette of the RS,” No. 40 from May 8, 2025, stipulates that only individuals who meet the conditions prescribed by Article 10 and Article 15 of the Law may be proposed and elected as members of the Regulatory Council, while point 8 of the Public Call stipulates that the authorized proposer must submit, along with evidence of the candidate's fulfillment of conditions, a written consent of the candidate in accordance with Article 13, paragraph 3, and a written statement from the candidate confirming to the authorized proposer that there are no impediments to their election as a member of the Regulatory Council as prescribed by Article 15, paragraph 1 of the Law.

“An example of the statement has also been published on the website of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia. By reviewing the content of the statement, it is clear that the candidate under full criminal and material responsibility declares that at the moment of submitting the statement there are no legal impediments established in Article 15 of the Law on Electronic Media,” UNS stated.

Therefore, UNS emphasized, “the arbitrary interpretation of the Committee that the fulfillment of this condition from Article 15 is assessed only at the moment if the candidate is elected as a member of the REM Council is not in accordance with the Law on Electronic Media.”

“We remind you that this statement is given in the proposal process, in writing, to the authorized proposer who submits it to the Parliamentary Committee for Culture and Information. The law should apply equally to all, regardless of who the authorized proposer is and who the proposed candidates are. If the conditions from Article 10 and Article 15 of the Law on Electronic Media were not fulfilled at the moment of proposing the candidate, that candidate cannot be elected,” concluded UNS in the complaint.