Maravi

Funding for political parties

Funding for political parties
By Editor
Thursday March 15, 2007 [02:00]

We are not surprised at UPND president Hakainde Hichilema’s revelation that politics have taken a toll on his family’s finances. This was foreseen going by the way Hichilema ascended to the UPND presidency. We remember very well that Hichilema was favoured to lead UPND after the demise of Anderson Mazoka on account of his tribe and his wealth - perceived or real. We recall some UPND enthusiasts demanding that Mazoka should not just be succeeded by a Tonga but a Tonga with money, a wealthy Tonga.

We also recall that when Mazoka was alive, it was almost taboo for anyone to suggest change of leadership. Even when his health was failing him, many UPND members and supporters did not entertain any idea to replace him. They argued that Mazoka had sacrificed a lot of his personal money in establishing the party and it was only fitting that he be the one to lead UPND. The few that tried to challenge Mazoka, like Robert Sichinga and others, were cowed into submission by those who believed that Mazoka should lead UPND to his death.

But this emphasis on money in the organisation and running of political parties, especially in Zambia, is undermining democracy. Individuals rise to top political positions mainly on the basis of how rich they are as they are expected to play a crucial role in financing the party; directly or indirectly.

That is why it is not uncommon to hear people who have nothing in their heads offer themselves even for the presidency of the country the moment they accumulate wealth from their often dubiously run businesses.

And because of the high levels of poverty in the country, politics is now taken as a business or some kind of employment, a source of livelihood. Therefore, those with money are easily favoured to take the lead because they are expected to part away with huge amounts of money in financing the party while those depending on politics for livelihood also help themselves. And the same people with money believe that they can ascend to power by using money to buy their way up. The top position is permanently reserved for them until they declare to the contrary.

But this is not how politics should be run. Individuals should rise to higher political positions on merit and not because they are multi-millionaires who can bankroll political organisations.
A political party cannot be sustained by an individual’s acts of benevolence from his or her accumulations. Personal money cannot be used to fund the organisation and run a party unless we are talking about a briefcase political party.

What we need are systems that will enable our political parties, whether ruling or opposition, to fundraise in a transparent and accountable manner. But this also is not an easy thing to do because it has its own challenges. Like many people have observed before, the funding of political process in Africa - not just in Zambia - is a burning issue today. This is because the consolidation of democracy requires the enhancement of capacities of the political actors and parties for action which can only be achieved by an equitable allocation of public resources among the actors.

In Africa, the electoral playing field is more often tilted in favour of the ruling party due to the fact that it controls the human and material resources of the state. Even when it comes to fundraising, private companies and individuals including other donors are, for obvious reasons, much more comfortable contributing to the ruling party and not the opposition.

The argument that government should fund political parties, especially those represented in Parliament, is good but we think that it cannot address all the problems associated with the lack of funds.
The concept of political funding refers generally to the manner in which political parties and individual candidates who seek to get elected to political office gather funds for electoral campaigns and in the case of political parties, this refers to the manner in which they seek to maintain themselves.

There could be a number of sources of political finance in general which include contributions from individuals, contributions from collective actors such as unions or corporations, subsidies from the state and resources mobilised by the political parties themselves such as membership fees, taxes on representatives, income from property or subsidiaries controlled by the party.

However, this is a very complex phenomenon to grasp. That is why some countries in Africa have introduced some kind of regulations such as disclosure regulations, the prohibition of certain kinds of contributions and spending ceilings all in an effort to address this problematic phenomenon.

In most African countries, funding rules are non-existent. But money plays a predominant role in African politics hence the urgency for formulating legislations likely to regulate political finance in African democracies.

In most countries, there is an acknowledged need to have some kind of regulation of political finance. It is feared that total absence of this regulation might lead to parties and candidates to be controlled by important donors. That is why every election time, there are all sorts of accusations or allegations against various parties. We hear statements like this party is being financed by the Chinese while other parties are said to be supported by the Taiwanese.

But this problem of funding must be discussed and addressed because the holding of democratic elections requires financial resources which are not in abundance in Africa because of the low levels of economic development. Part of the opposition’s problem is the allegation that the ruling party makes use of governmental resources for party activities. In most African countries, this is an open secret.

And most opposition parties are cut off from access to public funds and therefore disadvantaged in the electoral process.

Labels: EDITORIAL, PARTIES, POLITICS

posted by MrK @ 6:02 AM