University students in Serbia have called for snap parliamentary elections after months of anti-government protests triggered by a deadly infrastructure collapse, in the most serious challenge to President Aleksandar Vucic’s decade-long rule.

In a statement released on May 5, the protest group Students in Blockade (Studenti u Blokadi) called for the immediate dissolution of the National Assembly and snap elections. The group said the government had failed to respond adequately to the public outcry after the collapse of a concrete canopy at Novi Sad railway station on November 1, 2024, which killed 16 people.

“We believe democracy is the only correct way to resolve political crises of this magnitude,” the group said. “The roots of corruption have gone too deep into state institutions and have thus prevented them from performing their duties independently.”

The student-led movement, initially focused on demands for accountability in relation to the Novi Sad tragedy, has grown into a wider expression of public frustration over allegations of entrenched corruption. The unrest, the largest Serbia has seen in over two decades, comes against a backdrop of contested elections in December 2023, mass protests against lithium mining in 2024 and deteriorating public trust in institutions.

Though students initially claimed to be acting outside the realm of formal politics, and avoided aligning with any of the unpopular opposition parties, their push for early elections signals a more direct confrontation with the government and the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), which has been in power since 2012.

Vucic has repeatedly accused the students of acting as proxies for the opposition, whom he alleges are attempting to incite a “colour revolution” aimed at toppling his administration. In response, he has staged several pro-government rallies and formed a new movement “for the people and state”.

The SNS currently holds 112 seats in Serbia’s 250-member parliament and governs with the support of the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) and smaller allies, providing a stable majority on paper. However, the ongoing protests have exposed the vulnerability of the government in the face of public pressure.

Former prime minister Milos Vucevic resigned in January amid escalating demonstrations in Belgrade and Novi Sad. His successor, political newcomer and endocrinologist Djuro Macut, retained much of the previous cabinet, a move analysts say signals Vucic’s confidence in riding out the crisis without major concessions.

Several senior officials have already rejected the idea of snap elections. Vucevic, the SNS party head, said on May 5 that such a move would “lead the country into catastrophe”. Interior Minister Ivica Dacic claimed the students were being “manipulated” by a weak opposition incapable of winning elections alone.

Still, some opposition leaders have endorsed the students’ demand. Miroslav Aleksic of the People’s Movement of Serbia (NPS) called early elections “the only way forward”. The Democratic Party (DS) cited polls suggesting nearly two-thirds of Serbians support the protests.

Others, including Dragan Djilas of the Freedom and Justice Party and Milos Jovanovic of the New Democratic Party of Serbia, continue to argue elections should only be held under a transitional government to ensure fair conditions.

Ana Brnabic, president of the National Assembly and a senior SNS figure, dismissed the students' demands as “stupidity”, saying they lacked both understanding of constitutional procedures and coherent goals.

Despite official resistance, some analysts suggest Vucic may eventually call early elections in an effort to reset the political agenda and demoralise the protest movement.

With no elections due until 2027, a snap vote could serve to re-legitimise the ruling party. However, it also carries significant risks.

The student movement, though lacking clear goals and leadership, has attracted enormous support over the last six months. If it can unite around a credible platform or unify some of the opposition parties around one ticket, it could pose a serious electoral challenge.

The momentum behind the protests has waned in recent weeks. The massive weekend marches that defined early 2025 have thinned. Yet the movement’s creative tactics and grassroots appeal continue to draw national attention.

The key question hanging over the protests remains whether the surge of civic activism can be channelled into an effective political force. With no popular opposition figure or coherent political platform, the protests risk becoming a powerful but ultimately directionless expression of public anger.