8. Culture
Serbia's cultural life is shaped by a long tradition of artistic creation, significant national institutions, theaters, museums, film and music production, festivals, and numerous local events. Culture is an important part of a country's social identity, historical memory, and international reputation, but also a space where artists, intellectuals, and citizens can freely express their views on the society in which they live. Its value stems not only from artistic achievements but also from its ability to preserve creative independence, public debate, and critical thinking.
Many of Serbia's cultural institutions and programs depend on national, provincial, and local government funding, while significant funds are also provided through public enterprises, sponsorships, and various forms of institutional support. State and local authorities participate in the appointment of directors, decision-making on funding, the organization of events, and the distribution of funds for artistic projects. In a system where professional decisions are increasingly tied to political relationships, such authorities enable influence not only over the management of institutions but also over the employment opportunities, artistic expression, and public activity of their employees and collaborators.
Since May 2024, the Ministry of Culture has been led by Nikola Selaković, a long-time official of the Serbian Progressive Party and a close political associate of Aleksandar Vučić. He began his political career in the Serbian Radical Party, of which he was a member from 2001 to 2008, after which he participated in the founding of the Serbian Progressive Party and became a member of its highest leadership. Since the SNS came to power in 2012, he has continuously held high-ranking government positions, including Minister of Justice, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Minister of Labor. A special place in Selaković's political career is held by the position of Secretary to the President of the Republic, to which he was appointed by Aleksandar Vučić in 2017 and which he held until October 2020. His appointment as Minister of Culture was a continuation of his long-standing career within the highest structures of political power.
During Selaković's tenure, questions were also raised about his criminal liability. In December 2025, the Public Prosecutor's Office for Organized Crime filed an indictment against him on suspicion of abuse of office and falsification of an official document in the "General Staff" case. The trial began in February 2026, and Selaković denied the charges. However, his public response was not limited to disputing the allegations in the indictment. He called the prosecution rogue, linked its representatives to an organized crime group, and accused them of attempting to overthrow the government. Such conduct by the minister, who as a representative of the executive branch publicly discredits the institution responsible for criminal prosecution in the very case in which he himself is accused, constitutes a serious form of political pressure on the independence of the public prosecutor's office. In March of the same year, the Actors' Union of the National Theatre in Belgrade filed a separate criminal complaint against the minister, the chairman of the governing board, and the acting director of the institution, accusing them of actions that, according to the union, caused damage to the theatre and its employees.
However, political influence on Serbia's cultural life is not limited to the Ministry of Culture or the actions of a single government official. It is exercised through the appointment and dismissal of heads of cultural institutions, decisions on the funding of artistic projects, the distribution of public funds, the organization of local events, and the relationships between state institutions, private intermediaries, and artists. In such a system, the professional survival of individuals and organizations can become dependent on their willingness to conform to political expectations, while public disagreement with the authorities can jeopardize employment, commissions, and access to funding. At the same time, cultural institutions, festivals, and artistic communities remain important spaces for independent expression, social solidarity, and resistance to political pressure. It is precisely in the relationship between these spaces of freedom and the mechanisms by which political authority seeks to limit them that the position of culture in Serbia must be understood, along with its consequences for the free formation of public opinion and citizens' political choices.
8.1. Political Management of Cultural Institutions and Restriction of Employee Freedom
The management of Serbia's public cultural institutions rests on statutory powers held by the national government, provincial authorities, and local governments as their founding authorities. The founding authority appoints and dismisses the director, while governing boards participate in making important decisions about the institution's operations. The Law on Culture provides for the election of the director through a public competition for a four-year term, but it also allows for the appointment of an acting director without a competition, under certain conditions. Such an organization is not controversial in itself. However, when staffing decisions are made according to political interests, management authority can become a tool of control over institutions whose professional and artistic autonomy should be protected.
The director of a theater or other cultural institution handles much more than administrative matters. Their authority includes organizing work, hiring collaborators, implementing programs, and making internal regulations that directly affect employees. In such a relationship, political dependence at the management level can therefore carry over into artists' professional lives, even when there is no explicit order to support a particular party or to refrain from public criticism. Employees whose future engagements, artistic opportunities, and working conditions depend on the administration's decisions may be subjected to pressures that go beyond the usual employer-employee relationship.
Such relationships took on a new political dimension after the tragedy at the Novi Sad railway station on November 1, 2024, and the development of a student movement that demanded accountability from state institutions. In early February 2025, numerous theater ensembles across Serbia suspended performances and publicly endorsed the students' demands. Among them were the National Theatre, Atelje 212, the Yugoslav Drama Theatre, the Belgrade Drama Theatre, the Serbian National Theatre in Novi Sad, and theatres in other cities. In a joint statement, the artists explained that they were taking such a step due to the long-standing erosion of institutions, including cultural ones, and that they saw the student movement as a catalyst for professional self-organization and social responsibility.
Support for the students was not limited to the temporary suspension of performances. Theater artists began to speak more openly about the management of institutions, their funding, working conditions, and the political responsibility of directors. Thus, the long-standing issue of professional autonomy for the cultural sector became part of a broader social conflict. In the following months, staffing decisions and institutional disputes followed, showing how tense the relationship between political founders, management, and employees had become.
The National Theatre in Belgrade and the conflict over the management of a national institution
The National Theatre of Serbia, founded in 1868, is one of the most important cultural institutions in Serbia. Its Drama, Opera, and Ballet companies have shaped the country's artistic life for decades, while the institution itself holds a special place in preserving national cultural heritage and presenting world art. It is precisely because of this significance that the events that followed during 2025 went beyond the scope of a typical disagreement between employees and management.
On June 18, 2025, the Government of Serbia appointed Dragoslav Bokan as the president of the National Theatre's governing board. Bokan, a director and public supporter of Aleksandar Vučić's government, was the founder and commander of the "White Eagles" paramilitary formation during the 1990s wars, which operated in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. His political and wartime background prompted an immediate reaction from the institution's employees. The three unions of the National Theatre, which represent actors, ballet dancers, and musical artists, demanded the reversal of the decision, arguing that Bokan's past and public statements are incompatible with the values the national theater should represent.
The employees' opposition did not end with a demand for his dismissal. On June 24, representatives of the theater's troupes announced that they did not want to nominate their members to serve on the governing board under Bokan's chairmanship. In doing so, the conflict also extended to the very method of employee representation in the governing bodies. While the Government was exercising its legal right to appoint the leadership of the national institution, a part of the artistic community refused to grant professional legitimacy to such an appointment.
In early July, the Government appointed opera artist and university professor Dragoljub Bajić as acting director. The new management took over the theater at a time when employees had been publicly supporting student protests for months, and relations between the ensemble and state institutions were seriously strained.
The conflict was further deepened on September 25, 2025, when Bajić enacted a new Regulation on the Work Discipline and Code of Conduct for Employees. Article 3, Paragraph 1, Point 7 stipulated that a violation of work discipline was considered to be the public expression of political and other affiliations, whether verbal, through symbols, or gestures, as well as calling for activities of a political nature that are not related to the performance of the theater's duties. Another provision of the same regulation stipulated that failure to comply with the prescribed rules could be grounds for termination of an employment contract.
For actors and other artists, whose professional work involves public expression, such a restriction carried particular weight. Their support for the students' demands had already been expressed during curtain calls after performances, including by displaying symbols associated with the protests. The new rules opened the possibility for such actions to be treated as a violation of work discipline, with consequences for employment. The SINGLUS actors' union opposed the regulation, and the Drama ensemble announced a warning strike for October 3, when the disputed act came into effect.
On the same day, the Ministry of Culture and the management of the National Theatre announced that parts of the building would be closed due to safety deficiencies. According to the official explanation, an inspection by the Emergency Situations Sector of the Ministry of Internal Affairs found irregularities, leading to the ordering of a total of 59 measures. These included, among other things, problems with fire protection, evacuation routes, technical documentation, and previously renovated parts of the building. The Ministry stated that the inspection was initiated by the acting director himself upon taking office and that the identified deficiencies were the result of years of neglect of safety obligations.
Employees, however, questioned the circumstances and timing of the decision to close. It was announced on the very day a warning strike was scheduled to be held over the policy on political expression. Artists linked the sequence of events to a conflict with the new management, while the authorities insisted on security reasons. The existence of documented safety deficiencies does not, by itself, settle questions about how and when the closure was ordered, but the timing alone is also not sufficient to establish that the closure was a deliberate political reprisal. What is undisputed is that one of Serbia's most important cultural institutions was left without a regular repertoire during a period of an already open conflict between the management and the employees. The theater resumed performances for the public on December 7, 2025, approximately two months after its closure.
Challenge of the regulations before the Constitutional Court
The dispute over work discipline gained special institutional weight on November 5, 2025, when the Commissioner for Equality, Brankica Janković, submitted a proposal to the Constitutional Court to assess the constitutionality and legality of the disputed provision of the regulation.
The justification stated that the restriction on public expression was not clearly limited exclusively to the workplace and working hours, but could also encompass employees' political expression outside the theater. The commissioner concluded that the institution had exceeded its legal authority by using internal rules to restrict freedom of thought and expression guaranteed by Serbia's Constitution. She specifically pointed to provisions of the Labor Law, according to which an employee's political and other beliefs cannot constitute a justified reason for dismissal. She requested urgent action by the Constitutional Court and the suspension of the enforcement of individual acts and actions based on the disputed provision until a final decision is made.
In her proposal, the Commissioner also warned of the possibility of broader consequences if such a rule is retained in one of the nation's leading cultural institutions. Similar restrictions could become a model for other theaters and public cultural institutions. Thus, the question of employees' right to express political views has moved beyond the scope of an internal labor dispute and become the subject of proceedings by an independent state institution responsible for protecting equality.
The conflict continued throughout 2026. On March 6, the SINGLUS union filed a criminal complaint with the Public Prosecutor's Office for Organized Crime against Culture Minister Nikola Selaković, Board President Dragoslav Bokan, and acting director Dragoljub Bajić. The union accused them of acting in a detrimental manner toward the theater and its employees, specifically questioning the circumstances of the institution's two-month closure, its financial consequences, and the leadership's responsibility.
Professional disagreements did not cease even after the theater's reopening. In March 2026, the newly appointed artistic director of the Drama Department, Zoran Stefanović, sent a letter to the union president, Darko Tomović, announcing that the use of the stage for propaganda and content not integral to the approved play would not be tolerated. On March 15, after a performance of "The Master and Margarita," the actors announced to the audience that they were beginning a new warning strike. They continued to demand the withdrawal of the disputed provision of the regulations, improved working conditions, and the dismissal of the management. Thus, the conflict, which began after the organized support for the student movement, escalated into a protracted dispute over labor rights, the management of the national institution, and the boundaries of artists' freedom of expression.
Atelje 212 and the Political Dimension of Personnel Decisions
Similar questions of professional autonomy were raised at Atelje 212, one of Belgrade's most famous theaters, whose history is linked to contemporary drama, artistic experimentation, and a critical relationship with society.
On July 24, 2026, the Belgrade City Assembly used an expedited procedure to dismiss acting director Gordana Goncić and appointed director Ljubiša Ristić in her place. Goncić had been leading the theater as acting director since September 2024, so it was not a matter of terminating a regular four-year term. However, the manner in which the decision was made provoked serious opposition within the institution.
Ristić is known for his long career in theater, but also for his political involvement during the 1990s, when he was the president of the Yugoslav Left, a party associated with Mirjana Marković and the political system of Slobodan Milošević. His appointment was therefore not simply a change in artistic leadership, but also the arrival of a figure with a well-known political history.
The governing board of Atelje 212, chaired by Milan Lučić, unanimously decided to resign after learning of the appointment. The board members stated that they had not been consulted or informed of the reasons for the dismissal, deeming the procedure inconsistent with the principles of good governance for a public institution. They pointed out that the theater had just completed one of its most successful seasons, won six Sterija Awards, and achieved a positive financial result. They believed that these circumstances required a regular competition and the election of a director for a full term, instead of another interim management decision.
After a conversation with the ensemble and staff, the members of the governing board withdrew their resignations. They explained that they remained out of a sense of responsibility to the theater and the need to continue participating in protecting its professional interests. Their decision did not mean an acceptance of the way the new director was appointed. On the contrary, it showed that the employees and part of the management structure were seeking to preserve a space for institutional opposition to the founding authority's decisions.
Ristić, for his part, rejected interpretations that he was coming to Atelje 212 for political settlements and emphasized that he wanted to improve the theater's work. The mere fact of his previous political engagement does not prove the illegality of the appointment. However, the decision, made without prior consultation with the existing governing board and immediately after a successful theater season, demonstrated how limited professional achievements and the opinions of employees are when the city government uses its personnel powers.
Art Center "Terra" and the leadership change in Kikinda
While the conflicts in Belgrade theaters attracted significant public attention, similar issues have arisen in local cultural institutions, whose operations depend directly on city budgets and the decisions of local authorities.
The Terra Center for Visual and Applied Arts in Kikinda is known for its international terracotta sculpture symposium, its art collection, and its collaborations with creators from various countries. In a city the size of Kikinda, the center's importance extends well beyond its annual programming, as it connects the local community with the international art scene.
On May 5, 2026, the Kikinda City Assembly dismissed the Center's director, Aleksandar Lipovan, approximately fourteen months before the end of his term, and appointed Sanja Radusin Smiljanić as acting director. Lipovan had previously supported the student protests and the suspension of some cultural programs in solidarity with the student movement. After his dismissal, he stated that the decision was politically motivated and was preceded by a period of pressure on the institution's work.
The conflict was not limited to just the personnel issue. Local opposition representatives warned that earlier budget decisions had reduced funding for the Terra Art Center, thereby calling into question the organization of the international symposium. During the assembly debate, they also pointed to procedural irregularities in proposing the director's dismissal.
Such a relationship between local authorities and a cultural institution is particularly sensitive in environments with limited financial resources. When an institution depends on a single founding authority, changes in the budget and leadership can directly affect the maintenance of programs, international cooperation, and the continuity of professional work. In the case of "Terre," the additional political weight is the fact that the dismissed director publicly supported the student movement, while city officials denied that this was the reason for his removal.
Student Cultural Center and the Limitation of Space for Student Organizing
A different form of institutional conflict was recorded at the Students' City Cultural Center in Belgrade, an institution whose primary social role is directly connected to the cultural and educational life of students.
In early 2025, the institution's employees supported the student protests, suspended some of their regular programs, and made their facilities available for use by the protesting students. At the same time, they demanded a change in leadership, stating that the long-standing appointment of inappropriate personnel had undermined the institution's professional functioning.
During February, students held a plenum in the Cultural Center, which, according to employee testimonies, was attended by approximately seventy participants. Acting Director Dubravka Tomić reacted to the use of the hall, and employees claimed that she arrived during the student gathering accompanied by two police inspectors. After the plenum, the halls were locked, preventing students from using them as they had been. Employees stated that there were no incidents or property damage during the student gathering.
This conflict differs from the disputes over director appointments and work regulations in theaters. At its core was the use of a public cultural institution's space, a conflict between the management's decisions and those of the employees who wanted to open such a space for student organizing. An institution devoted to students' cultural life thus became part of a broader conflict over their right to assemble and speak publicly.
Professional Autonomy and the Consequences of Political Management
The events at the National Theatre, Atelje 212, the "Terra" art center, and the Students' City Cultural Center did not have the same immediate causes, but they are connected by the position of artists and employees in institutions whose leadership and funding largely depend on the decisions of state and local authorities. At the National Theatre, the conflict encompassed the appointment of management, the restriction of freedom of expression, and an institutional challenge to a regulation that could have had immediate consequences for employment. At Atelje 212, the question was raised about the founders' attitude toward the theater's professional achievements and governing bodies. In Kikinda, the director was prematurely dismissed following his public support for the student movement, while at the Students' City Cultural Center, a dispute arose over the use of the public institution's space for student organizing.
The consequences of political management in culture extend beyond leadership changes, restrictions on individual programs, and job insecurity among employees. They also affect the ability of cultural institutions to remain spaces for independent creation, public criticism, and social gathering. Artists, thanks to their professional standing and direct relationship with the public, can contribute to the free shaping of social attitudes and encourage citizens to publicly express dissent with the government. When such expression becomes linked to the risk of losing employment, commissions, or professional standing, the political pressure extends beyond the individual institution and affects the broader social space where citizens form political opinions and decide where to direct their support.
8.2. Allocation of Funds and Impact on the Possibility of Artistic Creation
Public funding for artistic creation is of special importance in Serbia, where many film, theater, music, and other cultural projects lack a sufficiently developed market or alternative sources of income that would allow for their continued operation. Decisions on the allocation of budget funds therefore directly affect the possibility of creating artistic works, the professional status of their authors, and the public's access to cultural content. In circumstances where political relationships intertwine with institutional decision-making, the question of funding culture also becomes a question of equality for artists before the state. This is especially the case when creators affiliated with the ruling party receive public support, while others, despite years of professional work and international recognition, are left without funds to realize their projects.
Film Center Serbia and a five-year dispute over funding for three directors
One of the clearest clashes between professional judgment and management authority occurred at Film Center Serbia in 2021. At the center of it were Goran Marković, Želimir Žilnik, and Srđan Dragojević, three internationally acclaimed directors whose work holds a significant place in Serbian and Yugoslav cinematography, as well as in broader regional filmmaking. In August of that year, the Film Center Serbia launched a special funding competition for established Serbian directors with at least five feature films and international festival experience. The competition committee proposed funding for three projects: Srđan Dragojević's film "Škartovi" with approximately $287,000, Goran Marković's "Doktor D" with approximately $230,000, and Želimir Žilnik's "Sloboda i barbarizam" with approximately $153,000. A total of approximately $671,000 was proposed for distribution.
The commission was composed of representatives from significant film and educational institutions, including the deans of the Faculty of Dramatic Arts in Belgrade and the Academy of Arts in Novi Sad, the director of the Yugoslav Cinematheque, and the president of the Association of Film Artists of Serbia. However, the governing board of the Film Center Serbia, chaired by Jelena Trivan, rejected all three proposals on November 25, 2021. The published decision offered no specific explanation for rejecting the committee's professional recommendations. In doing so, the governing body dismissed the experts' recommendations without clearly presenting the criteria on which it based its different decision.
The dispute was further deepened when actor and producer Tihomir Stanić publicly stated that Jelena Trivan had contacted him and asked him to abandon the production of Marković's film "Doctor D," hinting at other possibilities for collaboration. Stanić claimed he had rejected the proposal, while Goran Marković confirmed that the producer immediately informed him of the conversation. The rejections of the projects were followed by the resignations of four members of the governing board, and the management announced a new funding competition.
The announced competition was never held again, and the competition category for eminent domestic directors was not continued in subsequent years. Marković and Dragojević initiated legal proceedings against the Film Center's decision. On March 25, 2025, the Administrative Court ordered the Ministry of Culture to issue a statement, after which the Ministry, on October 21 of the same year, annulled the original decision of the governing board and returned the case for a new decision. The new governing board, chaired by Miroslav Lekić, returned the matter to the Ministry without making a substantive decision on it. On August 13, 2026, it concluded that there were no funds in the current budget for the 2021 call.
Thus, the call for proposals, in which an expert commission had recommended supporting the projects of three renowned directors, escalated into an almost five-year institutional dispute, during which the originally proposed projects were not realized with the funds from that call, and despite judicial and administrative proceedings, no effective solution was provided. In September 2026, Dragojević stated that he was prepared to seek legal protection before the European Court of Human Rights. The lengthy proceedings, the lack of justification for the original decision, and the Ministry's subsequent reliance on a lack of budget funds left open the question of the actual protection of artists' professional rights when their assessments and demands conflict with the decisions of state authorities.
From Controversial Competition Decisions to a Halt in Domestic Film Funding
Film Center Serbia's problems did not end with the individual case of the three directors. During 2025 and 2026, a broader crisis developed in funding domestic film production. In September 2026, almost two years had passed since the last calls for support for new film projects. Eight professional film associations appealed to the international film community, warning that the lack of funding threatens the survival of independent cinema. At the same time, film professionals spoke of political pressure, informal blacklists, and the restriction of professional opportunities for creators who publicly support the student protests.
Film Center Serbia explained the suspension of new funding competitions by citing the need to complete previously funded projects. In March 2026, the institution stated that 53 films, for which approximately $14.6 million had been allocated, were still not completed and that new calls for applications should be postponed until the use of previously awarded funds was clarified. However, the public was not presented with a complete list of the projects to which this claim referred. Professional associations challenged this reasoning, pointing out that film production takes several years and that numerous projects are still within their contracted deadlines. Without complete documentation, it was not possible to independently verify whether the status of previous projects justified an almost two-year absence of funding for new films.
At the same time, the Ministry of Culture continued to fund individual film events. On August 5, 2026, Minister Nikola Selaković signed a contract allocating approximately $163,000 for the National Film and Television Festival NAFFIT in Zlatibor. Although the funding of festivals and the production of new films are different budgetary purposes, their simultaneous existence, along with the prolonged stagnation of the Film Center's calls for submissions, has raised the question of priorities in the state's cultural policy.
Public Funding Competitions and the Independent Cultural Sector
The problems with funding were not limited to cinematography. Years of analyses of public funding decisions point to delays in announcing awards, declining funding for contemporary arts, and the unpredictability of institutional support. The analysis presented by Professor Predrag Cvetičanin on September 28, 2026, covered the calls for applications from the Ministry of Culture, the Secretariat for Culture of Belgrade, the Provincial Secretariat for Culture, and the Directorate for Culture of Novi Sad. Its findings allow for a comparison of the funding of professional associations, independent organizations, and other public fund recipients over the past few years.
During 2025, only eleven funding competitions for contemporary arts were held by the Ministry of Culture, less than half of what was planned. The total funds awarded amounted to approximately $2.24 million, compared to approximately $7.29 million in 2024. The results of some calls were delayed by more than one hundred days, and some by more than two hundred days, even though regulations stipulate a sixty-day deadline from the end of the application period. For organizations that plan their annual programs based on public funding, such uncertainty immediately complicates hiring artists, arranging international collaborations, and implementing already prepared projects.
At the level of the City of Belgrade administration, the problem has also taken the form of a complete halt to the competition process. On April 23, 2025, the Secretariat for Culture canceled all competitions for the financing and co-financing of cultural projects for that year, citing the resignations of certain members of the expert commissions and the impossibility of publishing the results within the prescribed deadline. As a result, artists and organizations that had already prepared and submitted projects were left without the city's regular source of funding for an entire year.
In 2026, the Ministry of Culture supported 953 contemporary arts projects with a total of approximately $4.51 million, which, according to the presented analysis, amounted to just 2.63 percent of the Ministry's budget. In the City of Belgrade's competition, 208 projects were supported with a total of approximately $958,000. Among the projects funded by the Ministry were only two programs from organizations in the Independent Cultural Scene of Serbia network, which brings together 107 organizations. This network's limited access to funds is particularly significant, considering its long-standing work in contemporary art, independent production, and international cultural cooperation.
One of the most striking examples is the Association of Dramatic Artists of Serbia, a representative professional organization with a long tradition. In the City of Belgrade's 2026 call for proposals, it did not receive funding for any of the programs it submitted. Projects left unfunded included the Dobričin prsten, Bojan Stupica, Miloš Žutić, and Ljubinka Bobić awards; monographs devoted to Anita Mančić, Bogdan Diklić, and Slobodan Unkovski; and the theater newspaper Ludus. None of the eleven independent artistic projects by its members were supported. The association announced that this outcome had occurred for the first time since the city's competitions for co-financing culture were established.
Other reputable organizations have also faced similar consequences. The Serbian PEN Center was left without city support for its centenary celebration, while the Association of Visual Artists of Serbia was approved only approximately $8,000 for its annual programs in two exhibition spaces. These are organizations whose significance does not stem from the current political affiliation of their representatives, but from their long-standing contributions to literature, visual arts, and international cultural cooperation.
Decisions on the funding of such programs have consequences that extend beyond individual organizations. Professional awards, scholarly publications, art monographs, and exhibition programs are part of the cultural memory and allow for continuity between generations of creators. Their exclusion from public funding affects not only the associations' leadership but also the artists whose work is presented and valued through such programs.
Political Connections and the Concentration of Public Funds
In contrast to the difficulties faced by numerous independent organizations and professional associations, individual creators and production companies continued to receive significant support from multiple public sources simultaneously. Among the most striking examples are the production company "Zillion film," associated with actor Lazar Ristovski, and the Belgrade Dance Festival, founded and directed by Aja Jung. Their projects were funded by the Ministry of Culture, as well as provincial and local authorities, often in amounts significantly larger than the funds awarded to other participants in the same competitions.
Lazar Ristovski is one of Serbia's most famous film and theater actors, with a long professional career. At the same time, he has publicly supported Aleksandar Vučić and the Serbian Progressive Party. He endorsed the SNS's electoral list in 2023, and in April 2025, he called on citizens to attend a rally in support of the government in Belgrade. The production company "Zillion film," in which Ristovski has an ownership stake and a leadership position, continued to receive significant support in public competitions.
During 2026, the company was approved approximately $192,000 from multiple public sources for three projects. In the competition for the Provincial Secretariat for Culture alone, it received approximately $96,000 out of a total of approximately $335,000 allocated for film projects. In the City of Novi Sad's competition, it was awarded an additional approximately $48,000 for two projects, one of which, the film "Vera Kroner," received approximately $34,000. For the same film, Film Center Serbia had already approved approximately $546,000 in 2024. Thus, the production company enjoyed a continuous stream of significant public support from multiple budget sources.
Aja Jung also has a long professional career in the field of artistic dance and organizing international cultural programs. The Belgrade Dance Festival has gained international recognition thanks to appearances by significant world companies and artists. However, Jung also had direct political involvement. In the 2018 Belgrade elections, she was second on the Serbian Progressive Party's electoral list, which was led by Aleksandar Vučić. At the time, she linked her decision to the support Vučić provided to the festival.
The Belgrade Dance Festival received approximately $160,000 in public funding for 2026 through competitions administered by the Ministry of Culture, the City of Belgrade, the Vojvodina Province, and Novi Sad. In the Novi Sad competition for theater arts and artistic dance, the festival received approximately $21,600, out of a total of approximately $49,300 allocated for the entire field. Other recipients from the same fund were often approved amounts of only approximately $960 or $1,920.
Comparing these decisions with the lack of support for the Association of Theater Artists of Serbia, limited funding for visual artists, and a years-long dispute involving three prominent film directors raises one of the most important questions of Serbia's cultural policy. Politically connected artists and organizations gain access to substantial public funding from multiple sources, while long-term professional work, international awards, and significance to cultural heritage do not secure even minimal institutional support for other participants in cultural life.
Such a distribution of funds provides a concrete basis for criticizing a system in which political proximity can be a significant advantage, while professional reputation and artistic achievements are not sufficient protection from financial exclusion. The artistic value of individual projects is not thereby rendered unimportant, but the level playing field on which different creators compete for funds from the same public budget is called into question.
The problem is not limited to funding a few well-known names. An analysis of the 2026 competition identified 197 projects, with a total value of approximately $1.59 million, that were flagged as problematic due to the applicant's insufficiently clear professional experience, lack of previous activities, registration status, or other circumstances requiring further justification of the decisions. Among them was the association "Nota, pero, USB," which was registered under that name in early March 2026, just before certain calls for proposals were issued. During the same year, the organization was approved a total of approximately $47,000 for five projects, including programs to present Serbia at cultural centers in Paris and Beijing.
Substantial public funding awarded to organizations with limited publicly documented experience, while support is simultaneously denied to representative professional associations, further calls into question the way cultural projects are evaluated. In a system where a significant portion of decisions are not accompanied by detailed and publicly available justifications, it is difficult to determine why certain recipients receive continuous support, while others are left without funds even for programs that have been a long-standing part of Serbia's cultural life.
Telekom Srbija and the concentration of film and television production
In addition to the direct allocation of budget funds, a significant impact on artists' ability to work is exerted through the operations of state-controlled companies. Over the past few years, Telekom Srbija has developed extensive capacities for financing and producing television series and other audiovisual content, becoming one of the key players in the domestic production industry.
Its position was further expanded at the end of 2025, when it acquired an 80 percent stake in the company Mondo INC. At the end of January 2026, the company, wholly owned by Telekom, became the sole owner of the production house Firefly Productions and its film studios. This consolidated substantial financial, organizational, and technical resources for film and television production within a state-controlled company.
This concentration directly affects the professional opportunities available to directors, screenwriters, actors, producers, and other film professionals. Major production companies decide on project selection, the hiring of artists and collaborators, production budgets, and content distribution. When public tenders for film production are suspended for almost two years, and a significant portion of commercial production capacity is within a state-controlled company, the number of alternative funding sources available to independent authors is reduced.
In September 2026, the American trade magazine Variety published a report on the crisis in the Serbian film industry. Interviewees from the professional community spoke of political pressure, informal blacklists, and difficulties in finding financing after publicly opposing the authorities. Some film professionals stated that their participation in protests, public statements, and social media activity could affect their ability to get future work.
Under such circumstances, the professional dependence of artists does not stem solely from individual funding decisions. It also arises from the concentration of opportunities for a particular project to be realized at all. An author who is left without support from Film Center Serbia, and who simultaneously lacks access to major production systems, faces a significantly narrower selection of institutions and companies to turn to.
The allocation of public resources thus becomes a powerful force shaping cultural life, as it determines not only which artists will continue to work, but also which works will be created and what content will reach the public. When professional achievements and the decisions of expert committees do not ensure equal access to funding, while politically connected actors receive continuous support from multiple public sources, political dependence can become a significant factor in artistic creation. The consequences of such a relationship are felt not only by the artists who lose their jobs, but also by society, whose space for independent culture, critical thinking, and free public expression is gradually narrowed.
8.3. Local Cultural Events and Political Conditions on Performers' Engagements
Local cultural events, city concerts, traditional gatherings, and music festivals are an important part of social life in Serbia. Many of these events have a decades-long tradition and attract audiences of different generations, while for smaller towns, they represent the most significant cultural events of the year. Their stages feature stars of folk and pop-folk music, as well as established rock, punk, hip-hop, and alternative bands whose professional reputation and audience have long since surpassed Serbia's borders. Such diversity reflects the richness of the domestic music scene, its connection to the cultural space of the former Yugoslavia, and contemporary European musical trends.
The organization of a large part of these events depends on funds from city and municipal budgets, public institutions, and private agencies that book performances. During 2025 and 2026, numerous concert cancellations and accounts of politically conditioned bookings were reported, involving performers from various musical genres with long-standing careers, large audiences, and international experience. Their professional standing, as well as the solidarity shown by a portion of the music community, gives these events a weight that goes beyond individual disputes over concert organization.
Public Money, Private Organizers, and Access to Concerts
The organization of major music events in Serbia is often entrusted to private companies that provide technical equipment, set up stages, and book performers. Among them, the Sky Music group, associated with businessman Milenko Škarić, holds a significant position. Its companies have developed extensive cooperation with government institutions, city authorities, and major event organizers.
The group's business includes events such as the Belgrade Beer Fest and Belgrade Music Week, as well as providing technical support for the political rallies of the Serbian Progressive Party. Companies linked to Sky Music have received significant contracts from government bodies and public institutions, while simultaneously establishing a strong presence in the commercial concert industry and the organization of publicly funded events. Such a concentration of business gives private intermediaries an important position between public funds, local organizers, and artists who depend on concert bookings. In environments where the local budget is the main source of funding for the cultural program, the choice of organizer can directly influence the circle of performers who get the opportunity to perform.
Milan Topalović Topalko and Seka Aleksić
Milan Topalović Topalko, an established folk singer with a wide audience in Serbia and the region, has performed for years at city squares and local events. According to his testimony, during 2016 and 2017, invitations from organizers began to disappear abruptly, even though he had previously performed as many as thirty times in a single season. When he tried to find out the reason, the people who worked on the technical organization of those events advised him, as he stated, to seek the appropriate contacts within the Serbian Progressive Party. He thus linked professional problems to political meddling in the distribution of performances funded by local budgets, years before his conflict with the President of Serbia became publicly known.
An open conflict occurred in early March 2024, after his appearance on the entertainment show "Šarenica" on Radio Television of Serbia was cut short due to a special television address by Aleksandar Vučić. Topalović publicly criticized the move, arguing that the president's frequent addresses were crowding out other content on the public broadcaster. He later spoke of additional canceled performances and the fear among some organizers that collaborating with him could cause problems with the authorities.
Similar problems during 2025 were publicly described by Seka Aleksić, one of the biggest stars of the Serbian and regional pop-folk scene. During a successful career spanning more than two decades, she has built a large audience in Serbia, the countries of the former Yugoslavia, and among fans of Balkan music in Western Europe. Her popularity and recognition extend beyond the music industry, making her one of the most influential public figures in regional popular culture.
After publicly supporting student protests and expressing disagreement with the actions of the authorities, Aleksić announced in July 2025 that her concerts in Bogatić, Ljubovija, and Pirot had been canceled. According to her, the organizers did not receive the necessary permits, but she was not given a clear explanation as to why the performances could not be held. At the same time, she stated that a television show she had appeared on was not aired, even though it had been previously recorded.
An interesting example of a different approach toward these performers is the "Mediana Cultural Summer" event, organized in July 2025 by the Mediana municipal district in Niš. Its program featured Topalović and Seka Aleksić, who performed on July 17 and 19. After the 2024 local elections, Medijana was governed by political groups that did not belong to the ruling coalition led by the SNS. Artists who had reported problems with bookings in other settings were given a platform at a publicly funded event organized by a local government of a different political makeup.
In contrast to the experiences of established performers who reported concert cancellations and professional pressures, a different position in publicly funded music programs was held by Jelena Karleuša, one of the most famous stars of the Serbian pop-folk scene and an open supporter of Aleksandar Vučić. In television political shows, she publicly defended the government and criticized artists who supported the civil protests, and in October 2026, she appeared alongside Vučić on the "Magazin In" show on Pink TV. Her political support was public and unequivocal, while her musical projects and performances simultaneously received significant financial support from the public sector.
In April 2025, the Municipality of Odžaci signed a contract worth approximately $158,000, including tax, for the organization of the music program for the "Days of the Redheaded Goddess" event, at which Karleuša performed. The contract was awarded through direct negotiation, citing a legal exemption from the regular public procurement procedure. The entire amount was for the organization of the program and not exclusively for her fee. In early August of the same year, the Municipality of Raška signed a contract with the singer's company, JK Entertainment, for the organization of her performance in Kopaonik, worth just over approximately $27,800, including tax. These contracts are just two documented examples of her performances being funded from local budgets.
Karleuša's financial relationship with the public sector extended beyond local concerts. Telekom Srbija, a state-controlled company, through its mts brand, sponsored her music projects as early as 2023, and the singer herself confirmed that she received funds from the company for a music video. While some recognized artists, due to public opposition to the government, were reporting a loss of performances and difficulties securing professional engagements, Karleuša was simultaneously collaborating with the state telecommunications operator and local authorities that funded her concerts. Such a contrast is an important part of analyzing the relationship between political loyalty and access to public funds for culture.
Goblini and the Political Determination of Acceptable Performers
Unlike cases where the reasons for cancellation remained insufficiently clarified, during the summer of 2025, the organizers of one of Serbia's most famous local events directly linked the decision to hire an artist to their political views.
The group Goblini, founded in 1992 in Šabac, is one of the most influential bands in the Serbian and regional punk rock scene. Over more than three decades, it has built a distinctive artistic identity, based on energetic music, socially engaged lyrics, and a critical attitude toward social phenomena. The band enjoys great respect among rock and roll fans, draws audiences of different generations, and represents an important part of Serbia's contemporary music culture.
In July 2025, Goblini was informed that their performance scheduled for August 8 at the "Days of Beer" event in Zrenjanin had been canceled. This is a traditional event that was celebrating its four decades of existence that year and which, throughout its history, has brought together numerous domestic and regional performers of various musical genres.
According to the statement the band made public, the organizers stated they were not interested in performers with "political connotations," further explaining that the event is family-friendly and for entertainment purposes. Goblini responded that they do not have a partisan political affiliation, but that they openly support the student movement and its demands for institutional accountability. Shortly before the cancellation, the band released the song "Idemo do kraja," dedicated to the students, whose music video was produced by students from the Faculty of Dramatic Arts. Thus, support for the student movement became part of the group's artistic expression, and soon after, the subject of an open dispute with the organizers of the public event.
The explanation for the cancellation was a direct example of political conditions being imposed on cultural programming. A musical group that had publicly expressed critical social views for decades became undesirable at a local event because of its support for the students. The decision sparked reactions from other artists and parts of the local community. The group Zoster from Mostar, known for alternative music that blends reggae, rock, and other contemporary genres, withdrew from the event in solidarity with Goblini. Some citizens of Zrenjanin called for a boycott of Beer Days, while protests were organized during the event.
The Zaječar Guitar Festival and the Threat to a Decades-Long Rock Tradition
A similar development occurred in August 2025, when the band Goblini was also canceled from the 58th Zaječar Guitar Festival.
The Zajecar Guitar Festival holds a special place in the history of Serbian and Yugoslav rock 'n' roll. Its tradition dates back to the second half of the 1960s, when young musicians across Yugoslavia were forming guitar bands and developing a new popular culture. Over the following decades, it grew into one of the longest-running rock events in Southeast Europe. Its central purpose was to give emerging bands the opportunity to perform before large audiences, while the revue program featured already well-known domestic and international artists. For generations of young musicians, Gitarijada was an important platform for professional recognition, and for the audience, a place to experience rock and alternative music.
After the Goblini announced they would not perform, a wave of other performers withdrew. The Belgrade band S.A.R.S., known for its blend of alternative rock, reggae, and ska, was among the first to cancel their participation in solidarity. They were followed by Električni orgazam, one of the most significant bands of the Yugoslav new wave; the Niš hard rock group Kerber; the Croatian punk-folk band Brkovi; and Deca loših muzičara, known for their blend of alternative rock and funk. The young bands NIT, a previous winner of the competition program, and Deminutiv also canceled their participation, which spread the dissatisfaction to the generation of musicians the festival was traditionally meant to provide a platform for.
Domestic rock veterans Generacija 5 and Riblja čorba then also withdrew from the performances. The members of Generacija 5 justified their decision with the social circumstances in Serbia, stating that they did not want their concert to serve to create the illusion of normality during a period of protests, violence, and political conflicts. The withdrawal of bands from different generations and musical genres showed that the conflict was not limited to the punk rock scene, but had engulfed a much broader part of the local music community.
The organizers of Gitarijada disputed the political background of Goblini's exclusion, claiming that a contract had not been signed with the band. However, Goblini had previously been listed among the festival's announced participants, which raised questions about how programming decisions were made and changed. Meanwhile, the event's location was also changed. Gitarijada was moved from its traditional venue in Kraljevica to the archaeological site of Felix Romuliana, with the official explanation citing security circumstances and infrastructure problems. The festival was nevertheless held from August 28 to 30, 2025, with a significantly altered program. Its 58th edition was marked by the withdrawal of a large number of announced performers and a serious disruption of the original program.
The events are made particularly weighty by the history of the festival itself. A festival that for decades had nurtured rock 'n' roll as an expression of generational independence and provided a platform for emerging bands found itself at the center of a political conflict over the public stances of its musicians. The consequences affected not only the established performers who canceled their appearances, but also the young competitors, the audience, and one of the most recognizable traditions of rock culture in Serbia.
Louder than censorship and solidarity among different musical generations
Pressures on musicians during 2025 were not limited to individual cancellations. At the end of September, a group of established artists and bands, together with the internationally renowned EXIT festival, launched the "Louder Than Censorship" initiative as a joint response to the professional exclusion of performers who had publicly supported the student movement.
The initiative brought together musicians of different generations and artistic styles, whose careers have shaped the contemporary cultural life of Serbia and gained audiences far beyond its borders. Among the signatories of the joint statement were the punk rock bands Goblini and Atheist Rap, representatives of the hardcore scene Ritam Nereda, the alternative rock band Kanda, Kodža i Nebojša, the group Eyesburn, which blends metal, hardcore, and reggae, as well as Marko Louis, whose music fuses soul, funk, and Balkan traditions. The initiative was also supported by the metal-punk band Mortal Kombat, contemporary electronic pop artist Luke Black, the alternative band Gospođo, bate, Nikola Vranjković, and other artists. Broader solidarity also included the Beogradski Sindikat, one of the most famous domestic hip-hop groups, as well as the funk-rock group Deca loših muzičara.
Among the participants in the initiative were performers who had been performing for decades at regional festivals, European concert tours, and international music events. Their joint action did not represent the founding of a single political movement, but rather an expression of professional solidarity among musicians of different artistic expressions, generations, and audiences, united in their opposition to the restriction of creative freedom and public expression.
One particularly striking case was the cancellation of a charity concert by the Novi Sad punk rock band Atheist Rap in Kisač, scheduled for October 4, 2025. The concert was intended to raise funds for the treatment of a five-year-old girl with a brain tumor and an eighteen-year-old young man facing a serious illness. The band had accepted an invitation from a local citizens' council to perform for free, but the organizers were not granted permission to use the public space.
According to public testimony from the group's members, the authorities did not approve the concert after learning who was organizing the event and which band was scheduled to perform. Atheist Rap linked this decision to its support for student protests. Instead of a performance, the group called on citizens to donate funds directly to the families in need. Thus, the political conflict over the use of public space also engulfed the humanitarian campaign, which aimed to raise funds for the treatment of children and young people.
The "Louder than Censorship" initiative did not stop at just the joint statement. In October 2025, in cooperation with the "Campus – Zone of Freedom" event, a solidarity concert was organized on the university campus in Novi Sad. The performers included Eyesburn, Marko Louis, Ritam Nereda, Kanda, Kodža i Nebojša, and Nikola Vranjković. The collected donations were intended for organizing a commemorative event on November 1st, marking the anniversary of the tragedy at the Novi Sad railway station. The participation of the EXIT festival in this initiative had special symbolic weight, considering its origins in the 2000 student movement and its international reputation. Its position and the consequences of its public support for the student movement are a separate topic of this chapter.
Lingering consequences in 2026
The problems musicians faced during 2025 did not end with the conclusion of the summer concert season. In August 2026, the British trade magazine IQ Magazine, dedicated to the international concert industry, published a survey on the situation of musicians and event organizers in Serbia. It featured testimonies about canceled performances, informal blacklists, and the fear among organizers that hiring artists who support the student protests could jeopardize their future funding and relationships with public institutions.
Members of Goblini stated that as of August 2026, they had held only two concerts in Serbia, while most of their performances took place abroad. They described situations where organizers they had previously worked with on a regular basis now inform them that there are no available dates for them. This practice does not require a formal ban on performing. An artist can be professionally excluded simply by organizers no longer inviting them.
A similar experience was shared by Marko Šelić Marčelo, a rapper, writer, and one of the most recognizable figures of socially engaged hip-hop in Serbia. His lyrics have dealt with political and social issues for years, and after publicly supporting the student movement, he spoke about a decreasing number of performance invitations. According to his testimony, festivals that depend on city budgets stopped hiring him, while some private organizers also backed out of collaborations for fear of possible consequences. He described the situation for himself and his band as a return to the beginning of their professional careers, after more than two decades of work.
The events described in this sub-item include artists of different generations, musical genres, and professional standing, from major folk music stars to established rock, punk, and hip-hop bands. Their experiences show how political pressure can affect opportunities to perform, access to public spaces, and professional engagements, as well as the preservation of cultural events with multi-decade traditions. At the same time, the organized solidarity of musicians has demonstrated the strength and diversity of a cultural scene that refuses to subordinate freedom of artistic expression to political loyalty. City squares, festivals, and events funded with public money belong to society, not to the political parties currently managing public budgets.
8.4. Financial and Programming Pressure on Cultural Festivals
Decades of tradition, international awards, and professional standing have not shielded some of Serbia's most important cultural festivals from political influence on their funding and management. Festivals that for generations have connected domestic artists with the world stage and contributed to the country's international reputation faced decisions during 2025 and 2026 that threatened their work and continuity. In Aleksandar Vučić's system of power, neither international recognition nor long-standing cultural significance proved sufficient to protect professional institutions from political decisions about their future.
BITEF and the Loss of Artistic Autonomy
The Belgrade International Theatre Festival, founded in 1967, has for almost six decades been one of the most significant achievements of Serbian and Yugoslav culture. During the Cold War, BITEF brought European and American theatrical avant-gardes together, presenting artists who were changing world theater. Its reputation was built on artistic freedom, experimentation, and a critical stance toward society.
In 2025, the Belgrade city authorities reduced the festival's financial and organizational autonomy, and its Board rejected the program prepared by artistic director Miloš Lolić and his team. Such a decision was unprecedented in BITEF's history. The artistic team considered it censorship, and the festival's official edition was not held that year. Instead, domestic artists, with the support of the international theater community, organized an independent ne:BITEF, which also featured the internationally acclaimed director Milo Rau.
The crisis continued in 2026, when six of the seven originally announced international productions withdrew from the official BITEF. The festival was held with an almost completely changed program, while the independent ne:BITEF was organized at sixty locations across Belgrade. This brought the conflict between the official management structures and the artistic community to an international level.
Nearly six decades of artistic prestige did not prevent BITEF from finding itself in a situation where its creators and international collaborators had to organize an independent festival to preserve the values on which it was founded. Political control over the institution proved possible, but it did not secure the support of the artistic community that had given it international significance for decades.
Nišville and the Withdrawal of National Government Funding
Nišville, an international jazz festival founded in 1995, became one of the most recognizable cultural symbols of Niš and southern Serbia over three decades. Greats of American music, such as Ron Carter, Solomon Burke, and other internationally recognized artists, have performed on its stage. The festival connected the American jazz tradition with Balkan music, while also developing educational programs and international cooperation among young musicians.
Despite this reputation, the Ministry of Culture did not approve funding for Nišville in either 2025 or 2026, ending its long-standing national government support. The organizers publicly supported student demands and criticized the authorities' cultural policy. The Ministry, for its part, did not dispute the festival's quality but instead left its funding to local sources, sponsors, and its own revenue.
According to director Ivan Blagojević, the loss of national government funding further aggravated financial problems and led to employee layoffs. The festival continued to be held thanks to other funding sources, including significant support from the City of Niš, but with serious uncertainty in planning future programs. The city allocated approximately $527,000 in 2025 and approximately $575,000 in 2026.
Nišville did not lose its international reputation, audience, or professional significance. It lost an important source of government support, which jeopardized its financial stability. Thus, the festival's fate became dependent not only on its own performance but also on the decisions of institutions that manage public funds.
FEST and a Break in the Festival's Tradition
The Belgrade International Film Festival FEST, founded in 1971, has for more than half a century been one of the most important places for the Serbian audience to encounter world cinema. Generations of viewers were introduced to the great works of American, European, and other world filmmakers thanks to this festival.
In 2025, FEST was not held. The city authorities justified the postponement with social and security circumstances, and then, before the previous board's term expired, the entire festival board was replaced. Among the newly appointed members was Lazar Ristovski, a public supporter of Aleksandar Vučić and the SNS, whose relationship with public funding for film production we have already analyzed in the previous subsection.
FEST was held again in October 2026, with 115 films, but its return did not erase the interruption of the traditional annual event nor the questions raised by the way the festival was managed.
Unlike BITEF, where there was an immediate conflict over the artistic program, FEST became an example of how much a major cultural event with a half-century tradition can depend on the organizational and staffing decisions of the city government.
International Prestige and Political Control of Culture
BITEF, Nišville, and FEST represent different artistic fields, different generations of creators, and different parts of Serbia's cultural life. Their institutional crises had different immediate causes, but together exposed how vulnerable the professional independence of cultural festivals is to decisions by political bodies controlling public funds.
An even more serious example is EXIT, an internationally recognized festival from Novi Sad, which, after publicly supporting the student movement, was left without significant sources of funding and was not held at its traditional location in 2026. Its case, which serves as the final section of this chapter, further raises the question of the political cost of publicly disagreeing with the authorities.
Artistic achievements, international awards, and decades of professional work should not be overshadowed by the political interests of those who currently manage public institutions. When cultural events become dependent on such relationships, the consequences are not only borne by their organizers and artists, but also by the society that created and sustained these institutions for generations.
8.5. Forcing EXIT Out and the Political Cost of Public Support for Change
EXIT was founded in 2000 in Novi Sad, out of a student movement for freedom and democratic change, during the resistance to the regime of Slobodan Milošević. Over the next quarter-century, it grew into one of Europe's most respected music festivals, twice awarded the title of Best Major Festival in Europe. EXIT's co-founder and long-time director, Dušan Kovačević, along with his team, has developed an internationally recognized festival organization whose projects have expanded beyond the borders of Serbia. EXIT has become one of the most recognizable cultural symbols of modern Serbia, connecting Novi Sad with the global music scene and attracting generations of young people from different countries.
The tragedy at the train station on November 1, 2024, in which sixteen people were killed, deeply affected Novi Sad and sparked a student movement demanding accountability from state institutions. The city where EXIT had emerged as a symbol of freedom and youth gathering became a wounded city, facing the loss of human life and questions of responsibility for the tragedy. Support for the students' demands for EXIT also represented a continuation of the social engagement from which the festival had emerged a quarter of a century earlier. For this very reason, the conflict that subsequently arose between the festival organizers and state institutions went beyond the issue of funding a cultural event and took on a much deeper social and political meaning.
Support for the students and denial of funding
The jubilee, 25th edition of EXIT, held from July 10 to 13, 2025, at Petrovaradin Fortress, was marked by support for the students and citizens who were demanding institutional accountability. The festival opened with a sixteen-minute silence in memory of the victims of the Novi Sad tragedy, and students were given space on the main stage in front of an international audience. With this public stance, EXIT affirmed the values from which it was born, in a city deeply affected by the tragedy.
Organizers reported that, after supporting the student movement, EXIT lost public cofinancing from the City of Novi Sad, Vojvodina Province, and the national government, as well as financial support from Telekom Srbija, whose mts brand had been the main sponsor for 22 years. According to their explanation, the reason for the support being withdrawn was not a decline in quality, attendance, or international reputation, but rather their refusal to abandon their public stance. Despite the loss of important funding sources, the anniversary edition was held, but the organizers already announced in 2025 that the traditional EXIT could not continue in Novi Sad under those conditions. The festival did not take place at Petrovaradin Fortress the following year, in 2026.
Media pressure and discrediting of the festival's founder
According to EXIT and Dušan Kovačević, the pressure also extended to his family. In May 2026, the police arrested Kovačević's brother on suspicion of social media posts. Pro-government tabloids framed the case with accusations of separatism and hostile activity, projecting them from the suspect onto the entire family and linking them to the festival. Kovačević said some outlets had reported the arrest before it took place and described the campaign as an attempt to discredit him and a continuation of pressure on EXIT for its support of students. Thus, the proceedings against a family member became a pretext for media challenges to the festival itself and its founder.
EXIT's international success and the loss of the festival for Novi Sad
While the traditional edition was not held at the Petrovaradin Fortress in 2026, EXIT's international organization continued to develop. In January, it won the Promoter of the Year award at the European Festival Awards, given to the European festival organization of the year. During the same year, its projects were realized in other countries, and in October, it organized the Starlight Festival with Egyptian partners in front of the Giza pyramids, with tens of thousands of attendees from more than a hundred countries.
A particularly striking example is Montenegro. In April 2026, its government officially supported two EXIT festival events in Ulcinj and Budva, recognizing in them an opportunity for tourism development, international promotion, and attracting new guests. Before the festivals took place, estimates suggested they could generate at least 210,000 tourist overnight stays and more than $45 million in direct tourist spending. These were projections, not subsequently confirmed revenues. According to organizers' data, both festivals generated a total of 144,000 festival visits over the summer, an amount equivalent to approximately 23 percent of Montenegro's population, which, according to the latest census, is 623,633. Festival visits do not represent the same number of unique attendees, but the figures illustrate the scale of the cultural and tourism events that Montenegro embraced as a development opportunity.
It is in this comparison that what Novi Sad has lost is most clearly seen. While other countries supported the internationally recognized festival organization as an opportunity for development and promotion, the city where it originated was left without the traditional EXIT. This happened after the organizers publicly sided with citizens who were demanding accountability for a tragedy in their own community, in a wounded city whose festival tradition had connected young people from Serbia with the world for a quarter of a century.
The withholding of public support and long-term sponsorship, a media campaign against the co-founder's family, and the festival's absence from Petrovaradin Fortress form the basis for the author's assessment that EXIT was driven out of its home city by political pressure. The international results achieved during the same year show that it was not the organizers' professional ability or the audience's interest that disappeared, but rather the possibility for their most famous project to continue its life where it was born.
EXIT's case completes the picture of political influence over culture in Serbia. The management of institutions, the distribution of public funds, decisions on engagements, and the programmatic autonomy of events represent different ways in which political relations can threaten creativity. Yet artists' resistance, professional solidarity, and their projects' international success also attest to a cultural strength in Serbia that exists independently of political power and cannot be appropriated by those who hold it.