Wednesday, March 22, 2023

是时候制定政治献金法

 

前首相慕尤丁的受贿和洗钱7项指控已让公众哗然,因涉及金额超过2.3亿令吉。尽管这让人大开眼界,但与另一位前首相纳吉相比这不算什么,后者在一马公司丑闻中,因将6.81亿美元(30亿令吉)注入个人账户而被提控多项贪污罪名,其中在挪用SRC国际公司4200万令吉一案中,巳罪名成立,目前正在服刑。当他们被指控索取这些资金时,他们是时任首相。

这响钟应当足以让人们关注金钱政治的问题,特别是政治献金如何影响或操纵选举结果,破坏自由和公平的选举民主。纳吉挪用的资金延长了2013年大选后的一届首相任期,慕尤丁的政治献金极可能导致他在上次大选中大有斩获,取得比预期更好的成绩。

能否仅仅责怪土著团结党涉贪呢?很难说,这就是为何慕尤丁的前首席机要秘书马祖基呼吁反贪委员会调查人民公正党和民主行动党的账目,以证明该机构没有选择性提控政治对手。

一个政党一般可通过三种方式来筹集资金:一、基层筹款,二、既得利益者(通常是大户捐献者)的私人捐款,三、公共资金。

目前,我国没为政党提供公共资金。许多传统政党凭著长年累积的基层党员,会通过会员费和各种形式的支持者自愿众筹,在基层筹款方面会有明显占更大的优势。反之,新成立的政党可能会遇到筹款难题,不容易获得足够数量的支持。

即使有了这些基层筹款的血汗劳力和参与式民主的良好示范,这笔资金仍可能不足以支付一个政党的所有费用,如日常运作(工资、水电和租金)、课题宣导、政策研究和政治宣传,以及最终最耗费的选举。

无人监控财团政治献金

大多数政党或许不会立即拒绝来自既得利益集团的私人捐款。除非相关部门开始调查可能涉及的不法行为,否则没有任何法律或法规可以直接监控这种资金流动。利益集团可能会提供几万、几十万甚至几百万令吉的捐款,但这类型的捐款很少会没有附加条件。这样的注资或不会签合约阐明条件,但这自然会产生一种期望,即政党胜选当权就会回报他们。

对捐献者来说,这更像是一笔投资,而不是出自他们对该党的真正热爱和支持。哪有那么热心爱党的支持者会理智地宣布投入2.3亿令吉的免费资金供该党使用?这是不寻常的。这就是为何土团党出事了。该党支持者一定感觉受到打压和为难,发现自己现有的处境是因为站在了政治的对立面。

一个没有法律限制的政治献金是一个大问题,因为选民不知道谁是该党背后撑腰的金主—这些金主们如何不正当地影响甚至操控了该党制定政策方面的议程和方向。可以想像制药厂对医疗政策、发展商对土地和环境政策、金融业对市场经济政策的影响,而这些利益集团要的极可能对公共利益造成伤害。让政治献金的多寡决定了政策走向是破坏民主精神的做法。

显然,当务之急是要减少政党对少数的大金主和既得利益者的依赖,这正是为何需要制定政治献金法──为健康的民主竞争打造一个公平的竞争环境。

针对个人和公司的政治献金需要有一个顶限数额。在去年8月由以政治献金为题的全党议会团体(APPG)起草的国会私人法案中,建议针对个人和公司的每年法定捐款顶限分别为5万和10万令吉。另外,外国人或公司,以及官联公司将不被允许捐款。为了方便监督和执法,所有筹款必须通过一个指定的政党银行账户,不能再通过个别的政党支部或政治人物的个人账户筹款。

政府应成立政治献金委员会,以监督政党每年需提交的财务报告,检阅政党的大户捐献者名单、确保执法的过程管理妥当。该委员会最好由享有公众信任和支持的独立委员组成,由联邦财政预算支付薪金和营运消费,并直接对国会负责以避免被行政机关操控。

公共资金分配各党

公共资金应是政治献金法的一个重要部分,以鼓励和争取各政党支持该法案,因为他们已必须遵守捐款限额和通报要求,公共资金将会是实在的好处弥补私人筹款局限。APPG法案中建议的公共资金数额也只需动用到联邦财政预算的0.05%或相当于1.3亿令吉,就可根据大选得票率向各政党分配公共资金。

或许大多数公众对公共资金倡议的第一反应是如此:“为什么我们需要为这些政党买单?”。可是啊,人民需要被告知,公共资金的替代选择就是鼓励各政党设法增加其私人政治献金的份额!这正是我国面对政治贪污现象的其中一个重要根源。


刊登于《東方日報》《群議良策》專欄2023年3月22日 

東方臉書鏈接

Time for political financing law (unedited original article)

Time for political financing law

Former Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin's bribery and money laundering 7 charges have been brought to public attention, involving sums of more than RM230 million. It is another eye-opener, although nothing compared to another former prime minister, Najib Razak, who is serving a jail sentence for siphoning US$681 million into his personal account.. When they were accused of soliciting such funds, they were sitting prime ministers. This should make people concerned about money politics and how political funding can influence or determine election outcomes and undermine free and fair electoral democracy. Najib's money extended his tenure as prime minister in the 2013 general election, Muhyiddin's may have led to a better-than-expected result in the last general election.

Can BERSATU alone be blamed? Hardly, which is why Muhyiddin's ex-aide Marzuki Mohamad has called on the MACC to investigate the PKR and DAP books to show that there is no selective prosecution.

There are three broad ways in which a political party can normally raise funds: i) grassroots fundraising, ii) private donations from vested interests (usually big donors), iii) public funding.

At present, there is no public funding for political parties in Malaysia. Many established traditional political parties would have a greater advantage in grassroots fundraising through membership fees and various forms of voluntary crowdfunding from supporters. Newly formed political parties would then find it difficult to achieve a critical mass of support.

For all the good practices of participatory democracy and the hard work that goes into grassroots fundraising, it may or may not be enough to cover all the expenses of a political party, such as day-to-day operations (salaries, utilities and rent), issue-based campaigns, policy research and advocacy, and ultimately elections. 

It is likely that most political parties would not immediately refuse private donations from vested interests. There are no laws or regulations that directly monitor this flow of money, unless the relevant authorities start investigating possible wrongdoing. Interest groups may offer tens or hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars, but rarely would such donations come without strings attached. They may not come with explicit promises, but there would be an expectation that the party in power would return the favour. For the donors, it's more like an investment than their genuine love and support for the party - it wouldn't be normal to declare support to the tune of RM230 million free money for the party to use!

This is how things have gone wrong for BERSATU. Its supporters must be feeling the heat as they now find themselves on the wrong side of the political fence. Private funding of a party without legal limits is often a major concern because voters do not know who the big money behind the party is and what their agenda and undue influence would be in terms of policy formulation.

Reducing the party's dependence on a few big donors and vested interests would be the obvious thing to do, but this is where the need for a law on political financing comes in - it is about creating a level playing field for healthy democratic competition.

There needs to be a contribution limit for individuals and companies. In the Private Member's Bill drafted by the former APPG on Political Financing last August, the statutory limits are RM50,000 and RM100,000 per year respectively. Foreign companies and government-linked companies would not be allowed to contribute. For monitoring and regulatory purposes, all fundraising must be done through a designated party account, not through party branches or individual politicians' accounts.

The government should establish a Commission on Political Financing to oversee the monitoring, regulation and enforcement processes for political parties to submit their annual financial reports and disclose major donors. The commission should consist of independent commissioners who enjoy public confidence and support, be paid from the federal budget and be accountable to parliament.

Public funding should be a key component of the Political Financing Bill in order to motivate political parties to support the Bill because of the tangible benefits to them of having to comply with contribution limits and disclosure requirements. The amount of public funding proposed in the APPG Bill would only require 0.05% of the federal budget or the equivalent of RM130 million to start distributing public funds to political parties based on vote share.

It may also be true that the first reaction of most members of the public to the proposed public funding would be: 'why do we have to pay for these political parties?' People need to be told and persuaded that the alternative to public funding would be to de facto encourage political parties to find ways of increasing their share of private funding!

Time for political funding law


Former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin is accused of bribery and laundering more than RM230 million.

It is another eye-opener, although nothing compared to the court cases of another former prime minister, Najib Razak, who allegedly embezzled US$681 million (RM3 billion).

Muhyiddin was in office when the alleged crimes took place. Najib has been convicted of some of the charges.

People should be worried about money politics and how political funding can influence or determine election outcomes.

Najib’s money extended his tenure as prime minister in the 2013 general election; Muhyiddin’s may have led to a better-than-expected result in the last polls

Is Bersatu alone to be blamed? Hardly, which is why Muhyiddin’s ex-aide Marzuki Mohamad has called on the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission to examine PKR and DAP’s books to show that the Bersatu president is not the victim of selective prosecution.

There are three broad ways in which a political party can raise funds: grassroots fundraising, private donations from vested interests (usually big donors), and public funding.

At present, there is no public funding for political parties in Malaysia.

Many established parties would do better in grassroots fundraising through membership fees and various forms of crowdfunding.

Newly formed parties would find it difficult to achieve a critical mass of support.

For all the benefits of a participatory democracy and the hard work that goes into grassroots fundraising, it may not be enough to pay for a political party’s day-to-day expenses (salaries, utility bills and rent), issue-based campaigns, policy research and advocacy, and, ultimately, its election machinery. 

Most political parties are unlikely to immediately refuse private donations from vested interests. There are no laws or regulations to monitor this inflow of money, unless the authorities are prompted to investigate suspected wrongdoing.

Interest groups may offer tens or hundreds of thousands or even millions of ringgit, but rarely do such donations come without strings attached. The conditions may not be explicit, but there would be the expectation that the party, when in power, will return the favour. The donations are more likely an investment than borne out of true love for the party.

Bersatu’s supporters must be feeling the heat as they now find themselves on the wrong side of the political fence.

Private funding of any party without legal limits is a major concern because voters do not know who the big funders are and what is their agenda.

Obviously, the party’s dependence big donors and vested interests should be reduced, and that is where a political financing law comes in. It is about creating a level playing field for healthy democratic competition.

There must be a contribution limit for individuals and companies. A private member’s bill drafted by the former all-party parliamentary group on political financing last August sets the statutory limits at RM50,000 and RM100,000 per year, respectively.

Foreign entities and government-linked companies will not be allowed to contribute.

For monitoring and regulatory purposes, all fundraising must be done through a designated party account.
 
The government should set up a commission on political financing to oversee the monitoring, regulation and enforcement processes for political parties to submit their annual financial reports and disclose major donors.

The commission should consist of independent commissioners who enjoy public confidence, are paid from the federal budget and accountable to parliament.

Public funding should be a key component of the political funding bill to win the support of the political parties because of the tangible benefits it will offer them, given that they have to meet the contribution limits and disclosure requirements.

The public funding of political parties proposed in the all-party parliamentary groups’ bill will only require 0.05% of the federal budget, or RM130 million.

It may also be true that the first reaction of most people to the bill will be: “Why do we have to pay for these political parties?”

The people need to be told that the alternative to public funding is private funding, the results of which they have seen for themselves.

144th article for Agora@TMI column, published on The Malaysian Insight, 20 Mar 2023