Money, Corruption, and Political Competition in Established and Emerging Democracies

In Ingrid van Biezen, a well-known researcher of political finances published seminal article on the regulation of party and election campaigns financing Biezen, , which showed that in the early s most of European countries applied the regulation on the mandatory disclosure of data related with party revenues and expenses, respectively, in general the money that goes into the election process. From 33 observed countries, the only one that did not applied this form of regulation was Albania, because of the generally low standards in the political parties regulation and the two most developed European countries, Luxembourg and Switzerland, where strict adherence to the rules of any kind of financial obligations are implied.

Apart from these two countries, the author did not have the data about existence of disclosure requirement in Denmark and Finland. Particularly interesting is that aforementioned obligations were introduced in the political systems of Norway and Sweden, although these two countries did not adopt any kind of party finance regulation.

Shortly, public disclosure requirement is adopted in at least 28 European countries, respectively, in 84 percent of the sample. According to Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, such an obligation is applied in 62 percent of the world's democracies and semi-democracies Pinto-Duschinsky, , so it can be concluded that this policy instrument has become a sort of routine practice tool in the modern party finance regulation. Additional types of this policy instrument should be distinguished , and one of them is an obligation to disclose all individual donors, criterion which is adopted by 32 percent of countries.

The next set of instruments is related to the institutional framework for prevention of corrupt activities in party finance, from openly buying votes to different types of payment extortions, especially of major donors like public companies on which government can have a strong influence. Their findings showed that in preventing corrupt practices in various areas, including the area of parties and elections financing, the most important issue is strengthening the rule of law, a change in mentality of key actors of different policies through a system of continuing education and the strengthening of law enforcement.

Before adoption of new and better anti-corruption laws, as a means of regulation, it is also important to strengthen trust in government as an institution. All these findings confirm that the mere existence of a law which is regulating financing of political parties activities is only one, but certainly not the most important element of the effective control of this area.

Therefore, the fact stated in Ingrid van Biezen study Biezen, , that 29 of the 33 observed European countries have a law which regulate parties and elections campaign funding still does not state too much about the effectiveness of this regulation 1. In some countries these limits are extremely low, but in many countries limits are set relatively high. Croatia, for example, follows middle way, and the limit for individuals is set to HRK 30, annually, but in previous versions of the party finance law limit was set significantly higher on HRK 90, Likewise, in some countries there are limited business sector donations to political parties, and in Croatia donation limit is set to HRK , for the political party or to HRK 30, for donation given to independent lists.

It is interesting that both of these instruments are used relatively rarely in the European context. Thus, only 12 of 33 countries use some form of restrictions on private donations from individuals, while the provision on the business sector donations limit is used in only 11 countries. In doing so, within developed European democracies these instruments are used only in Belgium and France.

It should be noted that situation is similar on the global level. Michael Pinto-Duschinsky Pinto-Duschinsky, shows that 28 percent of countries have some kind of restrictions on private individual donations, while for business sector donations the percentage is even lower and amounts only 16 percent. Much more used is instrument of prohibition or restriction on donations from foreign countries, which is applied in 15 of 33 countries in Europe, while at the global level the average percentage was somewhat higher - it was 49 percent. The same group of instruments also includes various types of expenditure constraints.

Acta Universitatis Danubius. Juridica, Vol 11, No 1 (2015)

This kind of regulation is applied in 15 of the 33 observed European countries; from Western European countries it is applied only in Belgium, France, Ireland and the UK. In non-European political systems, this type of instrument is found in approximately half of the countries. Much more widespread instrument is related to the possibility of television advertising. It is applied in 79 percent of the observed countries, so it became one of the most important instruments of campaign finance regulation.

• Mr. Kings Things.
• Phenomenology and the Human Positioning in the Cosmos: The Life-world, Nature, Earth: Book One (Analecta Husserliana).
• Money, Corruption, and Political Competition in Established and Emerging - Google Книги.

However, in some political systems paid advertising of campaign activities is disabled. This measure exists in 22 percent of the observed countries, where consequently television advertising is treated as a kind of public good that should be available to the relevant actors in the political arena.

However, the issue of paid advertising on television is related to the very delicate question of using the so-called third party advertising services, where private companies, which have leased advertising space with certain broadcasters, are giving this space to political parties. So the development of much more subtle policy instruments to regulate these issues thus becomes one of the major challenges in the further development of party finance regulation.

Perhaps the most controversial part of the institutional framework for the party finance regulation refers to a special body that exercises control over the political parties and elections financing. Thus various solutions exist , and about half of the political systems conduct this type of control through special state bodies which are in charge of elections, while in the remaining half of countries control is implement through the national audit offices and the Chamber of Auditors.

The existence of sufficient policy capacity of these institutions is shown maybe as the key prerequisite for effective control of party finances.

• Available on;
• The Comte De Gabalis;
• Our Organisation - FAQs on corruption.
• Witwe für ein Jahr (detebe) (German Edition).
• Sidewalks in the Kingdom (The Christian Practice of Everyday Life): New Urbanism and the Christian Faith.

In fact, the very existence of rules on disclosure of funds that parties got for everyday functioning or for the financing of election campaigns does not mean much if effective monitoring and effective enforcement mechanism are absent. The above mentioned institutions are important not only for the realisation of the of public control function, but also for each type of prevention which should be achieved in the parties and elections financing system, and also for the reliability of their financial statements and particularly for the existence of a sanctions system, for whose existence and implementation exactly abovementioned institutions are essential.

An important group of instruments is the public funding of political parties and election campaigns. Today it is considered that the public financing of political parties, which is particularly prevalent in the countries of continental Europe, is one of the pillars of transparent political finances. Gradually introduced since the s, first in some Latin American countries, followed by continental Europe, instruments related to the financing of political competition with public money have become a kind of democratic standards.

It is used in about half of modern democracies 49 percent , and in most of the political systems this form of political finance is combined with funding from private sources. Giving budget money to political parties can be a very convenient way to create a system of party finance regulation. For example, in Croatia, any kind of party finance disclosure was absent until the end of the s, although the parties , according to the provisions of the Political Parties Law adopted in , all the time regularly received money from the state budget.

The fact that parties did not publish details about their incomes and expenditures, although they were obliged by the law to do that, served to the group of non-governmental activists, gathered around the Croatian Law Centre, to put issue of political parties financing on the agenda. After all these pressures, publicly funded parties finally made their incomes and expenditures public in the late s, although even then it was not done by all of them. Today, another problem is connected with public funding which refers to the over-reliance on the budgetary resources.

Just as it is not good that public funding does not play role in the financing of the political parties, over-reliance on this instrument is also not good. Thus modern systems of party finance regulation today use specially designed instruments which encourage political parties to reduce reliance on budgetary sources. In this context different kinds of tax relief that are given to donors, individuals and legal entities should be observed , if they decide to donate political parties and independent candidates.

This type of instruments is currently used only in the most developed democracies of the world, in a several Western European democracies and Canada, but in the long run will certainly have a much stronger dissemination worldwide. Moreover, such measures, especially if they further limit the amounts that individuals can give to political parties, will potentially broad base of donors, so that a set of political parties financiers and set of voters will become set which is increasingly overlapping.

Party Finance Regulation Impact. After a certain political system adopts the party finance regulation, it faces challenge of implementation, which often can be problematic and difficult. Common elements essential for the implementation and impact of the party finance regulation are: Compliance with existing regulation is probably the most important element of implementation since even if detailed and precise regulation has not been adopted; it will provide certain level of transparency: This practice was particularly evident in southern Europe for example, in Italy and in countries in transition.

New and complex rules after their adoption set out requirements to the participants in the political process that requires, first of all, change of attitudes and behavior, and in some way limit their freedom of action in area which was previously unregulated. The optimal strategy for the implementation of the new regulation should start with informing and assisting participants in the political process: To encourage participants to respect the rules, those who respect the regulation should get certain material support, such as expenses reimbursement or tax benefits.

This strategy is adopted in many countries since public party funding is almost always associated with the obligation to respect regulation, primarily to publish financial statements Nassmacher, The second element is monitoring. The purpose of this measure is to make political parties accounts object of public debate: The main role in public debates should have institutions that, at least in principle, act on behalf of the public and are trying to protect public goods, such as political parties, NGOs and mass media. As in the second half of the 20 th century financing of political parties became a matter of public policy, in some countries agencies were established to monitor party finance.

Clearly, there is a lot more to democracy than elections — but elections are among its most visible elements, and they have become almost universal. Elections in post-conflict states: Public event 2 July Elections are deemed essential to provide needed legitimacy and to enable citizens to take part in shaping a common future. Yet elections can also be destabilising and act as detonators of further violence and conflict if conditions are not right.

Delivering services in Malawi: Public event 12 June This event will explore whether these elections will make a significant difference for Malawi's citizens - and for the country's progress on development outcomes.

1. Capabilities!
2. Crime Fiction: Volume 2.
3. ?

Can democracy deliver for development? He and his relatives are often mentioned in Nigerian letter scams claiming to offer vast fortunes for "help" in laundering his stolen "fortunes", which in reality turn out not to exist. There are two methods of corruption of the judiciary: Budget of the judiciary in many transitional and developing countries is almost completely controlled by the executive.

The latter undermines the separation of powers, as it creates a critical financial dependence of the judiciary. The proper national wealth distribution including the government spending on the judiciary is subject of the constitutional economics.

Mobile telecommunications and radio broadcasting help to fight corruption, especially in developing regions like Africa , [57] where other forms of communications are limited. In India, the anti-corruption bureau fights against corruption, and a new ombudsman bill called Jan Lokpal Bill is being prepared. In the s, initiatives were taken at an international level in particular by the European Community , the Council of Europe , the OECD to put a ban on corruption: The purpose of these instruments was to address the various forms of corruption involving the public sector, the private sector, the financing of political activities, etc.

To monitor the implementation at national level of the requirements and principles provided in those texts, a monitoring mechanism — the Group of States Against Corruption also known as GRECO French: Groupe d'Etats contre la corruption was created. A whistleblower also written as whistle-blower or whistle blower is a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, unethical, or not correct within an organization that is either private or public.

The information of alleged wrongdoing can be classified in many ways: Those who become whistleblowers can choose to bring information or allegations to the surface either internally or externally. Externally, a whistleblower can bring allegations to light by contacting a third party outside of an accused organization such as the media, government, law enforcement, or those who are concerned.

Whistleblowers, however, take the risk of facing stiff reprisal and retaliation from those who are accused or alleged of wrongdoing. Because of this, a number of laws exist to protect whistleblowers. Some third-party groups even offer protection to whistleblowers, but that protection can only go so far. Whistleblowers face legal action, criminal charges, social stigma, and termination from any position, office, or job. Two other classifications of whistleblowing are private and public.

The classifications relate to the type of organizations someone chooses to whistle-blow on private sector, or public sector. Depending on many factors, both can have varying results. However, whistleblowing in the public sector organization is more likely to result in criminal charges and possible custodial sentences. A whistleblower who chooses to accuse a private sector organization or agency is more likely to face termination and legal and civil charges.

Deeper questions and theories of whistleblowing and why people choose to do so can be studied through an ethical approach. Whistleblowing is a topic of ongoing ethical debate. Leading arguments in the ideological camp that whistleblowing is ethical to maintain that whistleblowing is a form of civil disobedience, and aims to protect the public from government wrongdoing.

In the opposite camp, some see whistleblowing as unethical for breaching confidentiality, especially in industries that handle sensitive client or patient information. Legal protection can also be granted to protect whistleblowers, but that protection is subject to many stipulations. Hundreds of laws grant protection to whistleblowers, but stipulations can easily cloud that protection and leave whistleblowers vulnerable to retaliation and legal trouble. However, the decision and action have become far more complicated with recent advancements in technology and communication. Whistleblowers frequently face reprisal, sometimes at the hands of the organization or group they have accused, sometimes from related organizations, and sometimes under law.

Questions about the legitimacy of whistleblowing, the moral responsibility of whistleblowing, and the appraisal of the institutions of whistleblowing are part of the field of political ethics. Measuring corruption accurately is difficult if not impossible due to the illicit nature of the transaction and imprecise definitions of corruption. One of the most common ways to estimate corruption is through perception surveys.

They have the advantage of good coverage, however, they do not measure corruption precisely.

Top Authors

This work is often credited with breaking a taboo and forcing the issue of corruption into high-level development policy discourse. Transparency International currently publishes three measures, updated annually: The Corruption Perceptions Index is the best known of these metrics, though it has drawn much criticism [64] [66] [67] and may be declining in influence. This index evaluates the risk of corruption in countries' military sector. The World Bank collects a range of data on corruption, [70] including survey responses from over , firms worldwide [71] and a set of indicators of governance and institutional quality.

Despite these weaknesses, the global coverage of these datasets has led to their widespread adoption, most notably by the Millennium Challenge Corporation. A number of parties have collected survey data, from the public and from experts, to try and gauge the level of corruption and bribery, as well as its impact on political and economic outcomes. These metrics include the Global Integrity Index , [75] first published in These second wave projects aim to create policy change by identifying resources more effectively and creating checklists toward incremental reform.

Global Integrity and the International Budget Partnership [76] each dispense with public surveys and instead uses in-country experts to evaluate "the opposite of corruption" — which Global Integrity defines as the public policies that prevent, discourage, or expose corruption. Typical second wave corruption metrics do not offer the worldwide coverage found in first wave projects and instead focus on localizing information gathered to specific problems and creating deep, "unpackable" [ clarification needed ] content that matches quantitative and qualitative data.

Alternative approaches, such as the British aid agency's Drivers of Change research, skips numbers and promotes understanding corruption via political economy analysis of who controls power in a given society. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Economics of corruption and Corporate crime. Human impact on the environment. This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources.

Navigation menu

Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. June Learn how and when to remove this template message. August Learn how and when to remove this template message. Gombeen man and Parochialism. Anti-competitive practices , Bid rigging , Fraud , and Charbonneau Commission.

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. This section is empty. List of anti-corruption agencies Baksheesh Comitology Conflict of interest Corruption Due diligence Government failure Influence peddling Malfeasance in office Pay to play Policy laundering Political class Political correctness Political corruption in the United States Political machine Principal—agent problem Regulatory capture Tax evasion Big government Gerrymandering.

Brookings Institution Press, Causes, Consequences, Scope, and Cures". Attitudes to the Tribe and Tribal Leader in the Sudan. Annual Review of Economics. Does the "rule of law" factor weigh more than we think? Journal of Development Economics. University of North Florida. Archived from the original PDF on Archived from the original on July 6, Case of Post-Soviet Russia". Archived from the original on April 5, The Wall Street Journal. Party and Parish Pump: Electoral Politics in Ireland.

Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Pastoralists at the Periphery: Herders in a Capitalist World. Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project.

Political corruption - Wikipedia

Right to Information Act India's magic wand against corruption". Archived from the original on An interview with Gerardo Reyes". Retrieved 3 September Journal of Public Economics. Journal of Political Economy. Journal of Media Economics. The Record to Date. Sunita Kikeri and John Nellis. Journal of International Economics. The death of Fidel Castro".

The Yale Law Journal. Retrieved 1 August Archived from the original on January 31, Guesstimating the Level of Corruption". In Kotkin, Stephen; Sajo, Andras.