ActionSA pointed out on Monday that while it is not opposed to transparency in political party funding, it opposed My Vote Counts’ (MVC’s) “short-sighted application”, which seeks to overhaul the Political Party Funding Act, as amended by the Electoral Matters Amendment Act, to compel parties to fully disclose all donations.

MVC has approached the Western Cape High Court to have the Act declared unconstitutional.

Currently, political parties don’t have to disclose donations under R100 000, and individuals can donate up to R15-million a year to a party.

MVC argues that small donations to smaller parties can have significant influence while multiple related companies can make undisclosed donations just below the threshold.  

ActionSA national chairperson Michael Beaumont said the application brought by MVC requires opposition because of its “short-sightedness, its unintended throttling of party campaigns” and the serious questions that need to be asked about the intentions of this organisation.

Beaumont noted that any organisation with a practical understanding of the country’s political democracy in South Africa, and with good intentions, would understand that this application does not assist the country’s democratic project.

He explained that the real fight for transparency in party funding, following the initial gains in the establishment of the Act and the Constitutional Court outcome that occasioned it, is to fight non-compliance.

“Countless cases of clear non-compliance have been reported to the IEC, and publicly, and it has been the IEC’s approach to require complainants to prove a case to an absurd evidentiary standard rather than investigate these matters themselves. MVC’s approach is to impose more disclosure requirements that, judging by the status quo, will be ignored,” he said.

Beaumont highlighted that the relief sought by MVC would have the effect of throttling party funding by small- to medium-sized donors who choose to make donations below the current threshold for fear of political or economic reprisal.

He explained that the reduction in the yearly maximum of donations, currently set at R15-million, would similarly throttle party funding.

“…the economic structure in South Africa, and the willingness of donors to be disclosed, has resulted in a very narrow donor community across all parties. Reducing this threshold would directly reduce funding to campaigns of parties and miss the obvious point – that such donors are being disclosed and, therefore, the constitutional principle of transparency is being achieved,” he noted.

Beaumont pointed out that any relief sought which unnecessarily throttles party funding impacts the country’s electoral democracy.

“The political choices of South Africans, especially given the prolific failures of established parties, is only as good as the ability of parties to campaign and offer political alternatives – and this requires funding. This is particularly felt by newer parties that have not yet won representation to the national assembly and, therefore, receive no State funding,” he added.

He explained that the “bureaucratic nightmare” that will arise from the relief sought by MVC, should it be granted, simply outweighs any further transparency gained.

“Both from the point of views of political parties and the IEC, massive expansions in financial operations will be required to record and report small-scale donations and track down data points from individuals in crowd funding mechanisms. Parties will effectively spend more on the financial operations required behind such disclosures than the donations themselves and based on the absurd notion that two strangers from different parts of the country would conspire with R10 or R20 donations to buy influence in a political party,” Beaumont said.

He argued that the assertion that all donors are would-be-corrupters buying political influence to advance their business interests is childish, especially when such donors are making donations that are disclosed precisely for the purpose of transparency and, if need be, investigation, he said.

He noted that to counter any losses in private funding arising from this application, the few prolifically State funded parties at the top of the spectrum will use their majority in parliament to direct more public monies to fund their campaigns than the “already obscene” amount of R1.5-billion a year.

“Newer parties will be throttled and their campaigns will not reach as many communities and places and fewer and fewer voters will turn out to vote because political choices will have been narrowed through constricting access to voters, he highlighted.