[1] The group Citizens Voting Against was formed from 88 civil society organizations (led GONG, Center for Peace Studies and Zagreb Pride),[6] supported by numerous public persons, film actors and actresses, academics, activists and politicians, including media such as Novi list and Jutarnji list and musicians, such as Severina, Dubioza kolektiv, Let 3, Hladno pivo, TBF and others.

[7] The Vote Against and the broader coalition of civil society organizations, Platform 112, claimed that the bank account listed on 'On behalf of the Family' web site does not belong to the initiative but an ad hoc registered association Građani odlučuju ("The citizens decide") which was founded by the vice-president of HRAST Krešimir Miletić.

[9] Voters were asked the question: Jeste li za to da se u Ustav Republike Hrvatske unese odredba po kojoj je brak životna zajednica žene i muškarca?Are you in favor of the constitution of the Republic of Croatia being amended with a provision stating that marriage is matrimony between a woman and a man?After the initiative gathered enough signatures to hold a referendum, it was widely speculated that the referendum would still not be held.

The political willingness in the Sabor to call a referendum was uncertain given that a left-wing coalition which opposed the proposed amendment held a majority of the seats.

[1] President Ivo Josipović called the referendum unnecessary, without practical political consequences regardless of the outcome, and a waste of taxpayer money.

[12] The president furthermore commented that marriage has already been defined in Croatian law as a union of man and woman, but that the referendum question has a strong psychological effect with an underlying discriminatory message.

[20] Cardinal Josip Bozanić encouraged support for the amendment in a letter that was read in churches where he singled out heterosexual marriage as being the only kind of union that is capable of biologically producing children.

[22] He remarked that the referendum was an opportunity for Christians to practically manifest their fate by voting yes, by respecting God's intent and serving the Truth.

[23] He echoed his previous statements that marriage and family are not a private affair of the individual which they can shape as they see fit, but are of wider social significance and must not be experimented upon.

This was strongly denounced by the Croatian Journalists' Association who invited all of the media to boycott the coverage of initiative on the referendum day, and emphasized the potential for the abuse of private information.

In the last few weeks we have seen a number of anonymous vulgar letters sent to respected journalists in which they are being insulted and threatened by unknown persons, and obvious semi-fascists, simply because of their position on the issue.

[31] This relative polarization of results between Croatian North and South has been interpreted by sociologists as closely connected to economic indicators as well as the extent to which the regions were affected by the war in the 1990s.

[33][34][35] Despite a low turnout in these areas, the outcome was significantly influenced by the so-called Serbian Cyrillic Referendum initiative, which aimed to curtail the official use of minority languages in Croatia.

[39] Milanović pointed out that the referendum was allowed by the constitution, that it is in no way related to the government, and no way does it change the existing definition of marriage according to Croatian laws.

[39] Hannes Swoboda, the President of the European Socialists, said that he "was deeply disappointed because he saw Croatia as an open and advanced society, and not as a country which prohibits happiness and equal rights".

[44] Croatian bishop Vlado Košić described the government official's opposition to the referendum as shocking, unacceptable and undemocratic, emphasizing that Croats are Catholic people, cherishing traditions by which they have lived for centuries.