Serbia’s incoming political leadership is preparing to review major infrastructure contracts and public spending, potentially affecting the country’s multibillion-euro investment programme and its relationships with international contractors, lenders and engineering companies.
The Student List, which secured approximately 52.7% of votes and a projected 140 parliamentary seats, has called for investigations into financial transactions linked to some of the country’s largest public investments. Projects under scrutiny include EXPO 2027, Belgrade Waterfront, the Miloš Veliki motorway, Corridor 10, stadiums in Leskovac and Loznica, Rio Tinto-related projects and pandemic spending.
Three major infrastructure projects under scrutiny
The Fiscal Council has raised concerns about the rising costs of several major infrastructure projects, including the Morava Corridor, the Belgrade–Zrenjanin–Novi Sad motorway and Đerdap 3. Their combined contract values and cost estimates amount to approximately €6.3 billion.
The figures represent project values and estimates, not money already spent. Any review would need to distinguish between original contract prices, additional works, changes in project scope, inflation and other cost adjustments.
Morava Corridor costs rise to €2.1 billion
The Morava Corridor, being built by the Bechtel–Enka consortium, was initially estimated at €800 million before its contract value reached €943 million. The latest estimate stands at approximately €2.1 billion, while construction is more than 92% complete.
The increase has been associated with inflation, pandemic-related disruptions, higher construction costs and contractual price-adjustment mechanisms. A financial and technical review would need to establish how much of the increase resulted from these factors, additional works, changes in quantities or design modifications.
Belgrade–Zrenjanin–Novi Sad motorway
The planned Belgrade–Zrenjanin–Novi Sad motorway, covering approximately 105 kilometres, has also attracted attention because of the difference between its initial cost estimate and subsequent contract value.
The original estimate for the expressway was €210 million, while a later contract with China’s Shandong International Economic and Technical Cooperation Group was valued at €1.6 billion. Physical construction remains at approximately 10%. However, the project’s scope has changed, meaning that a direct comparison between the original estimate and the later contract value would not provide a complete assessment. A review would need to examine the technical and economic justification, changes in scope and contract amendments.
Đerdap 3 estimate reaches €2.6 billion
The proposed Đerdap 3 hydropower project has seen its estimated investment value increase from €1.4 billion to €2.6 billion, despite remaining in the technical preparation phase.
An assessment would need to consider expected electricity market conditions, integration of renewable energy, balancing requirements, energy storage value, price differences, grid constraints and potential alternatives, including battery storage.
Financial oversight and investor confidence
Reviews of major infrastructure contracts would also involve examining payment certification, contractor financing, working capital requirements, sovereign guarantees and termination provisions. Independent financial and engineering audits could help distinguish justified cost increases from procurement weaknesses, inefficient project management or changes that require further explanation.
The process could have implications for international contractors and lenders involved in Serbia’s infrastructure programme. Greater transparency may strengthen public oversight, but changes to existing contracts would also need to respect legal obligations and provide predictability for investors. The central challenge will be to establish whether higher project costs reflect legitimate changes in scope and market conditions or weaknesses in planning, procurement and contract management.
