Politics is a Money Game

By Rejoice Ngwenya 

American President Barack Obama’s social network savvy electoral team was reported to have raised in excess of one hundred million US dollars in personal campaign funds. This is the budget of Zimbabwe’s 2013 parliamentary and Presidential election! If the so-called

smaller Zimbabwe political parties – ZAPU, NDP, Zapu/FP, ZANU Ndonga, ZPP, MKD, MDC99 – had access to a mere one tenth of Obama’s budget, the quality of democratic competition would increase tenfold.

According to numerous surveys conducted by Professor Eldred Masunungure for ZESN, it does not take anything to register a political party in Zimbabwe. In fact, the Private Voluntary Organisations [PVO] Act that moderates registration of NGOs is stricter than the ‘registration’ of political parties. One assumes the new electoral laws will correct this anomaly.

Political parties need money to run their offices, print party materials and pay for meetings and advertisements. They ‘survive’ on party structures and members, thus to maintain this network, they require thousands of dollars. Herein lies the challenge: if a political party is not registrable – for want of a term – to what extent can the leaders of that party be called to account?

There are credible arguments for disclosure; however, it is still highly debatable whether or not ‘official’ political parties like ZANU-PF, MDC and MDC exercise full disclosure even within their ranks. Electoral candidates have frequently complained of discrimination - especially women candidates. When party leaders embark on epic fundraising trips to Europe, there is no auditing system to make them account for each dollar raised. Even when candidates produce budgets for personal party regalia, meetings and constituency trips, more often than not party treasurers reject or mutilate these budgets. A National Democratic Institute research reveals how party leaders’ personal funds contribute 12% of total electoral expenditure in Africa. This promotes cronyism, founder member syndrome and party ‘ownership’.

Some wards and constituencies – especially in rural areas – are so vast candidates need motorized transport. If there have no money, they cannot meet their constituents or compete effectively with better resourced candidates. The big parties like ZANU-PF, MDC and MDC can book press advertisements, send candidates for trainings to workshop, pay per diems and release press statements. When there is need for litigation, these parties can attract the best lawyers in the land. At times they are even accused of vote buying and false promises of empowerment. All because they have the money.

In a constitutional democracy like we have in Zimbabwe, political participation and representation is a right. This right is easily moderated by political institutions but if the potency of such institutions is limited by unavailability of money, the state has a constitutional obligation to fill the deficit. US$5 million has so far been budgeted for three eligible parties in 2013. However, as long as the Political Parties Finances Act does ‘not recognise small parties’, those members under the tutelage of  ZAPU, NDP, Zapu/FP, ZANU Ndonga, ZPP, MKD, MDC99 will be condemned perpetually to the fringes of political insignificance. The danger is also that candidate selection may be based on resourcing resulting in elitism.