Political Party Accountability

 

The National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI) and the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats (CALD) are pleased that you will be participating in the workshop on Political Party Accountability in Bangkok August 14 to 16, 2003.

 

This workshop is part of a regional program NDI and CALD launched in March 2001 to support Asian political parties in their efforts to implement internal reforms through enhanced democracy, accountability, and transparency in party structures and practices.  In addition, the program explores the challenges facing parties with respect to party financing, national legislation and regulations, and evolving public expectations.

 

At the workshop, political party leaders and reformers representing both ruling and opposition parties from nine countries will come together to share experiences, network, and discuss challenges to creating strong, accountable political parties and to tackling the problem of money politics.  In addition, representatives from NGOs, the media, and academia will participate, and participants will explore ways in which parties can collaborate with outside groups.  The workshop aims to ensure complete participant ownership and management, and almost all of the facilitators, presenters, and chairpersons at the workshop will be the participants themselves, with the exception of a few resource persons.  At the workshop, NDI and the CALD Secretariat will play only a consultative role.

 

A Steering Committee of eight persons, including politicians from Thailand, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Taiwan, helped identify the objectives and draft the agenda for the workshop, with input from NDI and CALD staff persons. 

 

Program Rationale and Background

 

Corruption poses one of the gravest threats to economic growth, democracy, and political stability, in countries across the globe at all stages of political and economic development.  In Asia, in particular, political corruption has taken on a new prominence in public discourse due to its devastating impact on public confidence in political and economic institutions.  Actors from all sectors, including political parties and political party leaders, recognize the need to develop more effective strategies to control the influence of money in politics and monitor political finance. 

 

Increasingly, political parties are recognizing their central role in both the problem of and solution to political corruption.  Whether motivated by a principled commitment to the ideals of good governance or by more practical considerations of political survival and electoral appeal, political party leaders across Asia are prioritizing reform efforts.  In some cases, party leaders have provided substance to their reform rhetoric, supporting national political finance legislation as well as implementing specific measures such as codes of conduct, declarations of assets, and other changes that promote greater transparency within party operations and increase accountability of party structures. 

 

Despite this new recognition within Asian political parties of the need to make parties more accountable and the financing of politics more transparent, often parties are not included in larger dialogues on political corruption and money politics at the national and regional levels.  Increased efforts are needed to bring parties into the anti-corruption debate and to support party reform initiatives.  For this reason, NDI and CALD launched a regional party program on Political Party Strategies to Combat Corruption in March 2001. 

 

In the first stage of this program, NDI and CALD conducted research to identify existing party reform strategies, whether voluntarily adopted or mandated by external legislation.  This research took place in eight countries:  Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nepal, the Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand.  NDI and CALD first examined the external environment in which parties function, including the country’s current political climate, governance and electoral systems, legislation governing parties, and problems with political corruption.  Most importantly, however, the research focused on internal political party reforms, and the parties shared various strategies they have used to promote greater internal democracy, accountability, and transparency in their decision-making processes, candidate and leadership selection, financial management and fundraising practices, and ethical criteria and disciplinary procedures.

 

Building upon the research, the program brought together 28 Asian political party representatives in Bangkok in January 2002 to discuss their experiences in democratic development and build upon the reform strategies identified in the research.  The workshop provided an opportunity for parties, in some cases fierce political competitors, to at least temporarily lay aside partisan interests and share perspectives on the challenges they confront.  The parties represented some of the oldest in Asia, such as the Kuomintang of Taiwan, as well as some of the newest, such as the Parti Keadilan of Malaysia.  They also represented great diversity in their financial conditions, ideologies, and levels of organizational development. 

 

Despite these differences, few disagreements on matters of principle emerged at the workshop.  Parties agreed, for example, that enhancing accountability by installing modern financial management systems was essential and that parties should also make efforts to improve their financial transparency through public disclosure of their accounts.  Participants also pledged to involve the electorate in decision-making and the candidate selection process through public opinion polling and constituent outreach at the grassroots level.  There was also a consensus that parties must move from the informal, patronage-based organizations of the past to become more professional, rule-based institutions.

 

Following the workshop, NDI consulted with Asian political party leaders to design a workplan for future national-level activities.  Several parties approached NDI with specific requests for activities in their countries.  In the Philippines, for example, NDI helped party representatives organize a workshop on the draft political party law.  In South Korea, parties requested NDI’s assistance in building understanding between parties and the vibrant NGO community on issues of reform.

 

Bangkok II Workshop Objectives

 

At the Bangkok 2002 workshop, one of the key recommendations was for an “annual review.”  Participants agreed that the workshop should not be “a one-time program” and expressed their interest to “continue to learn from one another.”  Specifically, the parties requested that NDI monitor and document reforms made by each party, the results of which would be discussed at the second workshop.  Starting in March 2003, NDI has interviewed party representatives to document significant party policy shifts and discuss any changes made to the party’s internal practices and decision-making procedures.  The results of this documentation will serve as a guide for a second regional workshop, Bangkok II.

 

One objective of the second workshop, therefore, is to review party reform progress and allow parties to share their experiences and successes with their colleagues.  Several of the same topics from Bangkok, such as candidate and leadership nomination processes, financial management practices, and the enforcement of ethical standards and discipline, will also be revisited at this workshop.

 

NDI and CALD will not, however, simply repeat the format and themes of the first workshop.  Another objective of the second workshop will be to expand participation in the party reform debate by including representatives from NGOs, media organizations, and academia.  As participants in the 2002 workshop pointed out, parties alone cannot address problems of corruption without the aid of other groups.  Moreover, it is evident that, to date, political parties have not been successful at communicating their reform agendas to the public, and hostility toward political parties and politicians from outside groups has engendered mutual distrust.  Therefore, this workshop will attempt to build consensus between different groups on effective and realistic ways to enhance the democratic nature of parties, monitor political finance practices, and reduce political corruption.

 

Parties can use this forum to advertise their reform platforms and demonstrate their commitment to change.  In order to help build greater understanding between the different groups and to develop realistic recommendations, parties may also explain some of the challenges they face in financing elections and meeting voter expectations.  In turn, civic groups can request oversight responsibilities and pledge to hold parties accountable to their reform commitments.  In addition, media, NGOs, and other groups may advocate for enhanced disclosure of party practices and finances in order to allow them to monitor effectively.

 

It is evident that the broader national political and economic structures and political culture (such as the level of economic development, the independence of the judiciary and media, level of education, among other factors) determine in many ways the state of political corruption and the development of political parties in any given country.  These issues cannot all be adequately addressed at a regional conference, as the contexts differ significantly from country to country.  The conference will therefore focus on the internal structures of political parties, explore the common challenges parties everywhere face, and examine different mechanisms to monitor party practices and finances.

 

The conference will not concentrate on personalities or politics but rather on the party systems and how they can be improved.  Members of the Steering Committee expressed concern that parties would not want to discuss internal party affairs in front of competitors.  As a result, the conference will not explore details about private financial matters or political strategies.  Further, there will be no discussion of specific corruption scandals.  Rather, the conference will examine general party systems, processes, and procedures and will highlight positive reform strategies and best practices.

 

Because of the expanded nature of this workshop, NDI and the CALD Secretariat have invited approximately 35 political party representatives, many of whom have attended the first workshop.  However, over the past two years, NDI and the CALD Secretariat have developed additional contacts within the parties and have extended invitations to reformers who did not attend the first event.  NDI and CALD have also included approximately 15 representatives from NGOs, media, and academia.   These groups will be selected based on their involvement in reform and watchdog activities and interest in collaborating with party reformers.

 

Activities

 

DAY ONE

 

Following welcoming remarks, the first day of the workshop will provide a brief update on political party developments since the first Bangkok workshop, highlighting a few reforms undertaken in various countries.  Workshop participants will then share internal party reform efforts and explore challenges to enhancing party accountability and transparency.  There will be two panels – “candidate and leadership selection processes” and “fundraising and finances.”

 

In the first panel, party representatives will share various mechanisms for selecting leaders and candidates and describe some of the challenges in “democratizing” the internal selection process.  Panelists will address issues such as the influence of money and patronage, internal factionalism, primaries and polling, and party cohesion.  In the second panel, party representatives will discuss fundraising tactics and challenges, donor influence, the conflict between transparency and donor privacy, and differences between opposition and ruling party fundraising strategies.

 

Following the panel presentations, discussion will be open to the floor.

 

DAY TWO

 

The second day of the workshop will address external reform efforts and challenges to monitoring political party practices and financing.  While the first day focused more on internal party structures and presentations by politicians, the second day will address the experiences of non-party representatives in the reform process.  Following an opening presentation on monitoring activities, there will be three panels – “public awareness and participation,” “legislation and institutions,” and “role of watchdogs.”

 

In order for party and political finance reform efforts to succeed, public understanding and involvement are crucial.  In the first panel, NGO representatives will share their experiences in developing civic education programs, advocating for reform, and organizing citizens at the grassroots level. 

 

The second panel will address legislative and institutional approaches to political party and finance reform.  One presentation will provide an overview of political party and finance regulations and some of the lessons learned from a global perspective.  Another presentation will focus on disclosure and the challenges facing oversight bodies.  In addition, another panelist will describe the importance of the independence and neutrality of watchdog institutions.  Finally, a party representative will share a politician’s perspective on legislative reform and its impact on parties.

 

The final panel of the day will examine the watchdog role of NGOs, academics, and journalists.  Panelists will discuss monitoring methods and limitations, investigating and reporting on corruption, and ensuring credibility.  There will also be a presentation on the role that academics can play in advancing reform through research and data collection.

 

Following each panel, discussion will be open to the floor.

 

DAY THREE

 

On the final day of the workshop, participants will discuss opportunities for collaboration between various sectors on party and political finance reform.  There will be a final panel in which presenters will discuss inter-party dialogue and cooperation, party-civil society partnerships, and regional networking possibilities.  This panel will be followed by a discussion on next steps and ways in which participants can continue to communicate after the workshop.

 

Preparation and Questions for Consideration

 

This workshop requires the active and thoughtful involvement and contributions from all participants.  The workshop results and agreements will be the exclusive product of the discussions and recommendations from participants, while NDI and the CALD Secretariat will play only a facilitative role.  It will be helpful, therefore, for participants to spend some time planning for the workshop, considering the key topic areas to be addressed and the contributions they would like to make.

 

Party candidate and leadership selection

 

This topic addresses the process for determining both the party’s candidates for public office and the party’s leadership and officials.  Party representatives will have the opportunity to share the various procedures their parties employ for choosing candidates and leaders, the problems they have encountered, and any reforms their parties have implemented in the selection process. 

 

Questions for consideration:

 

-          What are some measures of selecting candidates that reduce opportunities for corruption and manipulation?  Should all members vote on the selection of candidates?  Should a committee decide?  Should members of the public be consulted?  Should branch offices choose the candidate from their areas? 

-          How should leaders and officials of the party be selected?  By election?  By appointment?  How should local party leaders and officials be determined?

-          Should party leaders have ultimate veto power? 

-          What are some problems encountered in the selection process of both candidates and leaders?  Vote buying?  Bribery?  Cronyism?  Patronage?

-          What are possible mechanisms for reform?   Open primaries?  Public opinion polling?  Full membership elections?  Term limits for all positions?  What are the advantages and disadvantages of each option?

-          Is there a trade-off between internal democracy and effectiveness?  What are some of the risks associated with opening up the selection process?  Does greater member involvement in selecting candidates and leaders lead to splits in the party?

 

Party financial management and fundraising 

 

This topic addresses the way in which the party manages and raises money.  Participants will discuss the various procedures their parties use to manage finances and raise money and mechanisms for avoiding abuses. 

 

Questions for consideration:

 

-          Should professional accountants manage party funds? 

-          Should party financial records made available to all members of the party?  To the public?  To any particular government monitoring agency?

-          Should there be external audits of party accounts?

-          How should party funds be controlled?  Who should have authorization over bank accounts?  Are greater checks on financial management advantageous?

-          Are there examples of fundraising tactics that limit opportunities for corruption?  Should there be specific fundraising guidelines?  Who should manage fundraising for the party?  Should party members have to report all the funds they raise?

-          Should parties place any restrictions on donors?  Are there sources of funding parties should reject?  How can parties monitor for contributions from “dark sources”? 

-          Is it difficult to keep track of the money coming into the parties?  How should parties handle contributions going directly to the candidates?  In cases where funds are given to candidates, do parties have any particular policies to monitor and keep track of such exchanges?

-          How can parties protect the privacy of their donors despite public demands for greater transparency?

-          Do opposition and ruling parties face unique challenges in fundraising? 

 

Legislative and institutional reform

 

This topic addresses the legislative and institutional reform options, and participants will discuss different frameworks, their shortcomings and strengths, and lessons learned.  Participants will also examine the role of enforcement bodies – the election commission, the courts, the public prosecutor’s office, and the anti-corruption commission -- in limiting corruption in political finance practices.  Oversight bodies in many countries complain that they do not have the resources, both human and financial, to monitor financial exchanges effectively and are not granted the “teeth” to dole out punishments.  Therefore, participants will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the bodies and methods for improvement.

 

Questions for consideration:

 

-          What role can legislation play in limiting political corruption?  What are the common loopholes?  How can regulations determine “realistic” costs of running a party and campaigning? 

-          Auditing and declarations:  Should party officials be required to declare their assets and liabilities?  Should external audits be mandated?

-          Limits:  how effective are limits on party expenditures/contributions in leveling the political playing field?  Do contribution limits violate freedom of speech, as some opponents argue?  Can limits drive illegal practices underground and hinder disclosure?  How can limits be effectively enforced, particularly spending by a party?  Should the law include expenditures made by individuals on behalf of a party or candidate?  Can contribution limits encourage wealthy individuals to set up their own parties instead of funding parties? 

-          Restrictions on donors:  Do restrictions on donors contribute to a cleaner political process?  What type of donor should be restricted?  Are loopholes easily created to make this regulation ineffective?  Should contributors have the right of privacy?

-          Disclosure:  How can the law ensure compliance with disclosure requirements?  What about the issue of donor anonymity?  What are some incentives for disclosure?

-          Public funding:  What are the effects of public funding?  Can public subsidies discourage constituency relations?  To whom do parties become accountable if the government provides the key source of their funding?  Can public funding create “fake” parties and members?  How can a law prevent this?  In practice, does the provision of public funding lessen parties’ dependence on corrupt sources of financing? 

-          How can the neutrality of enforcement bodies be ensured?  Who should appoint commissioners?  How can objectivity be enhanced?  How can cases be expedited? 

-          What constraints do enforcement bodies face?  Do they receive pressure from outside groups, such as politicians and parties?  Do they have enough staff?  Do they have sufficient training?  Sufficient salaries?

-          What institutional changes are needed to make enforcement more effective?  Political changes?  Bureaucratic changes? 

 

Public awareness/Role of watchdogs

 

This topic addresses the ways in which NGOs, the media, and academia can aid the reform process.  Participants will discuss efforts to educate and involve the public in reform efforts.  Participants will also focus on ways to improve investigation and research tactics and how to best use information.  Presentations will also address ethics in monitoring efforts.  Critics have accused NGOs and press of being irresponsible and partisan, and participants may identify ways in which watchdog groups can be more constructive and balanced in their coverage.

 

Questions for consideration:

 

-          Is there an inverse correlation between high levels of public participation in politics and political corruption?  If so, how can public participation be fostered?  What are successful examples of civic education programs?  How can parties better reach the public?  How does politics become “issue-based”?

-          How can civic groups monitor party finances and fundraising practices?  Monitor donors?  How can financial reports be verified?  How can limits on expenditures be monitored?  How can groups investigate money coming from illegal sources? 

-          How can groups document the influence of donors on party platforms and agendas?  Investigate the impact of donations on government policy?  Is long-term tracking of legislative decisions necessary?  How can procurement systems and government contracts be monitored for favor exchanges?

-          How does one address the problem of vote buying?  Should attention be on the buyer?  Seller?  Both?  What role can voter education play?  What are some of the underlying roots of this problem?

-          What types of investigation are most successful?  Using existing information and reports from the parties and donors?  Proactively collecting data?  How does one identify sources?

-          How can watchdogs best use their information?  Publish the data and let the public decide?  Launch “blacklisting” campaigns?  Meet with the parties to discuss their findings?  Other methods?

-          How can groups demonstrate their neutrality?  Who monitors the monitor?  Do journalists and NGOs follow codes of ethics?  How transparent are NGOs and journalists themselves?

 

Multi-sector collaboration on reform

 

In addition to exploring the separate roles and activities of each sector, the aim of the workshop is also to identify ways in which groups can collaborate. 

 

            Questions for consideration:

 

-          How can a holistic approach to political finance reform be formulated?  How can different sectors serve as a “check” on one another and still collaborate? 

-          Do we make assumptions about who has “moral authority” (e.g. NGOs/civic groups)?  How accountable and transparent are watchdogs?  Do the monitors also need to be monitored themselves?

-          What does it take to generate political will among leaders?  Public outrage?  Civil disobedience?  Negative campaigns?  How can protest and advocacy translate into voter behavior? 

-          With widespread disgust in political parties, is the political party system at risk?  Is dismantling political parties the answer?  Are parties essential components in a democracy?  What can party reformers do to change popular perceptions?  Who are they up against?

-          Have business leaders been exempt from blame?  Do solutions need to look at both supply and demand?  How does the reward system work?  Where does the bureaucracy enter the picture?

-          What are the limitations of legislation and governmental bodies?  How can regulations be simplified and improved?  How can enforcement be strengthened?  Where does responsibility fall?  What are key components to successful disclosure?

 

The workshop does not aim to answer all the questions posed above, nor are these questions inclusive.  Rather, the questions are designed simply to present some “food for thought” prior to the workshop.  We strongly encourage each participant to bring ideas, suggestions, and questions of her or his own.