Loading...
Accountability and transparency in political finance
Transparency International
Transparency International
Author(s)
Contributor(s)
Keywords
accountability
finance ethics
finance ethics
GE Subjects
Political ethics
Community ethics
Ethics of law
Rights based legal ethics
Governance and ethics
Community ethics
Ethics of law
Rights based legal ethics
Governance and ethics
Collections
Files
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Online Access
Abstract
"Political finance can undermine the same democratic values and good governance that it also supports. The two main risks are that resources (monetary and non-monetary) can distort electoral processes and may improperly influence the decisions taken by a country’s elected representatives.1 Electoral processes. Money can distort the electoral competition when it is unfairly distributed among candidates. When accountability is low, resources are left open to abuse by parties and candidates. Incumbent politicians may abuse state resources to fund their re-election campaigns. Resources for electoral contests may be diverted and the money pocketed by candidates or used for vote buying. When proper controls are not in place, campaign financing can even be converted into a conduit for money laundering, as has been documented in countries like Bosnia and Herzegovina, El Salvador and Haiti.2 Elected representatives. Political financing can perversely shape policy-making after elections are over — particularly when candidates are funded instead of parties. Such claims in the United States recently have forced key members of Congress to step down.3 Unfortunately, poor communities find themselves at the losing end of this money game. An oil company in Nigeria can use campaign contributions to sway votes; poor citizens concerned about related environmental problems cannot.4 Domestic policies may not be the only area affected. In countries where contributions from abroad are allowed or have occurred de facto, political finance can also distort a government’s foreign policy decisions. Modern democracies strive to contain these two risks through laws and regulations, including ceilings for campaign spending and contributions, bans on certain funding sources and the use of public subsidies for parties and campaigns. However, these measures are not always sufficient to mitigate the negative impacts that political finance can produce. Either the laws are too lax or enforcement is lacking. Public oversight by citizens, civil society and the media can complement state controls. Yet for both to function, transparency must exist. Transparency means that comprehensive, detailed and reliable information on the financing of political campaigns is available to the public in a timely, intelligible and accessible way (see sidebar). There are three interconnected levels across which increased transparency can be promoted to reduce corruption risks related to political finance: accountability within parties: the requirement to use proper internal bookkeeping and accounting systems and keep party members properly informed. accountability to the state: the requirement of parties and candidates, donors and service providers to report on political finance transactions to state agencies. accountability to the public: the requirement to disclose publicly all information on campaign finance."
Note(s)
Topic
Type
Journal
Date
2008
Identifier
ISBN
DOI
Copyright/License
With permission of the license/copyright holder