Measuring the enforcement capacity of political financing supervisory bodies

Symposium
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

One of the most innovative measures of the political financing regulatory reforms of the past 2 decades was the creation or designation of new political financing supervisory bodies, entrusted to monitor and enforce political financing regulations. These bodies have been growing in numbers in the last 2 decades, partly in response to public opinion pressure and partly to international commitments. Drawing on regulatory and organisational capacity theories, this article seeks to develop a new index to measure the enforcement capacity of these bodies.

Keywords

Political financing Regulation Supervision Enforcement Measurement 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Pedro Lourenço for compiling some of the data used in this article and Paul Heywood and Martin Bull for their valuable comments. Needless to say, the author is solely responsible for the contents and any errors and omissions that may be detected in the article.

References

  1. Alexander, H.E. 1980. Financing politics: Money, elections and political reform. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
  2. Casal Bértoa, F., F. Molenaar, D.R. Piccio, and E.R. Rashkova. 2014. The world upside down: Delegitimising political finance regulation. International Political Science Review 35(3): 355–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. CNCCFP—Commission Nationale des Comptes de Campagne et des Financements Politiques. 2010. Presentation of France’s National Commission for Campaign Accounts and Political Funding, Paris: CNCCFP. http://www.cnccfp.fr/presse/kit/cnccfp_en.pdf. Accessed August 19, 2015.
  4. Council of Europe, European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission). 2010. Guidelines on Political Party Regulation by OSCE/ODIHR and Venice Commission, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 84th Plenary Session (Venice, 15–16 October 2010), Strasbourg, 25 October 2010), Study no. 595/2010, CDL-AD(2010)024.Google Scholar
  5. CSPL—Committee on Standards in Public Life. 2007. Eleventh Report: Review of the Electoral Commission [Presented to Parliament by the Prime Minister by Command of Her Majesty January 2007], London: The Stationery Office, Cmnd. 4057, January.Google Scholar
  6. De Sousa, L. 2004. The regulation of political financing in Portugal: A political and historical analysis. West European Politics 27(1): 124–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Sousa, L. 2014. New challenges to political party financial supervision in Portugal. South European Society and Politics 19(1): 113–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DiMaggio, P.J., and W.W. Powell. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48(2): 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Doublet, Y.-M. 1997. L’Argent et la Politique en France. Paris: Economica.Google Scholar
  10. Doublet, Y.-M. 2010. Political financing: GRECO’s first 22 evaluations, Third evaluation round, [Secrétariat du GRECO, 19 May 2010]. Strasbourg: Council of Europe/GRECO.Google Scholar
  11. Eurobarometer. 2012. Corruption – Special Eurobarometer 374 / Wave EB76.1 – TNS opinion & social, [Fieldwork: September 2011], Survey coordinated by Directorate-General Communication, Conducted by TNS Opinion & Social at the request of Directorate-General Home Affairs, Brussels: DG Home Affairs. http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/ebs/ebs_374_en.pdf. Accessed 19 Aug 2015.
  12. European Commission Country Report. 2014a. EU Anti-Corruption Report: Annex 10 France, Brussels, 3.2.2014 COM(2014) 38 final.Google Scholar
  13. European Commission Country Report. 2014b. EU Anti-Corruption Report: Annex 5 Germany, Brussels, 3.2.2014 COM(2014) 38 final.Google Scholar
  14. European Commission Country Report. 2014c. EU Anti-Corruption Report: Annex 14 Latvia, Brussels, 3.2.2014 COM(2014) 38 final.Google Scholar
  15. European Commission Country Report. 2014d. EU Anti-Corruption Report: Annex 22 Portugal, Brussels, 3.2.2014 COM(2014) 38 final.Google Scholar
  16. European Commission Country Report. 2014e. EU Anti-Corruption Report: Annex 24 Slovenia, Brussels, 3.2.2014 COM(2014) 38 final.Google Scholar
  17. European Commission Country Report. 2014f. EU Anti-Corruption Report: Annex 28 United Kingdom, Brussels, 3.2.2014 COM(2014) 38 final.Google Scholar
  18. Ewing, K.D. 1987. The funding of political parties in Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Ewing, K.D. (ed.). 1999. The funding of political parties: Europe and beyond. Bologna: Cooperativa Libraria Universitaria Editrice Bologna.Google Scholar
  20. Falguera, E., S. Jones, and M. Ohman (eds.). 2014. Funding of political parties and election campaigns. A handbook on political finance. Stockholm: International IDEA Handbook Series.Google Scholar
  21. Galleigh, N. S. 2010. A Model for Party Finance Supervision? The First Decade of the UK’s Election Commission. School of Law Working Paper Series No. 2010/19, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  22. Global Integrity. 2014. The Money, Politics, and Transparency Campaign Finance Indicators: Assessing Regulation and Practice in 54 Countries across the World in 2014. Published online: https://www.globalintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/MPT-CFI-2014-Key-Findings.pdf. Accessed 27 February 2018.
  23. GRECO—Group of States against Corruption of the Council of Europe. 2007. Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Slovenia on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II), Adopted by GRECO at its 35th Plenary Meeting, Greco Eval. III Rep. (2007) 1E Theme II. Strasbourg: Council of Europe/GRECO.Google Scholar
  24. GRECO—Group of States against Corruption of the Council of Europe. 2008a. Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Latvia on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II), Adopted by GRECO at its 39th Plenary Meeting, Greco Eval. III Rep. (2008) 1E Theme II. Strasbourg: Council of Europe/GRECO.Google Scholar
  25. GRECO—Group of States against Corruption of the Council of Europe. 2008b. Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on the United Kingdom on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II), Adopted by GRECO at its 36th Plenary Meeting, Greco Eval. III Rep. (2008) 1E Theme II. Strasbourg: Council of Europe/GRECO.Google Scholar
  26. GRECO—Group of States against Corruption of the Council of Europe. 2009. Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Germany on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II), Adopted by GRECO at its 35th Plenary Meeting, Greco Eval. III Rep. (2007) 1E Theme II. Strasbourg: Council of Europe/GRECO.Google Scholar
  27. GRECO—Group of States against Corruption of the Council of Europe. 2009. Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on France on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II), Adopted by GRECO at its 36th Plenary Meeting, Greco Eval. III Rep. (2009) 1E Theme II. Strasbourg: Council of Europe/GRECO.Google Scholar
  28. GRECO—Group of States against Corruption of the Council of Europe. 2010. Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Portugal on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II), Adopted by GRECO at its 36th Plenary Meeting, Greco Eval. III Rep. (2010) 1E Theme II. Strasbourg: Council of Europe/GRECO.Google Scholar
  29. Heidenheimer, A.J. (ed.). 1970. Comparative political finance: The financing of party organizations and election campaigns. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.Google Scholar
  30. Lodge, M., and K. Wegrich. 2012. Managing regulation: Regulatory analysis, politics and policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nassmacher, K.-H. (ed.). 2001. Foundations for democracy: Approaches to comparative finance [Essays in Honour of Herbert E. Alexander]. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  32. Pinto-Duschinsky, M. 1981. British political finance 1830–1980. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  33. Pollock, J.K. 1926. Party campaign funds. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  34. Rose, R., and A.J. Heidenheimer. 1963. Comparative political finance: A symposium. Journal of Politics 25(3): 643–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smilov, D.M., and J. Toplak (eds.). 2007. Political finance and corruption in Eastern Europe. The transition period. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  36. Stratmann, T. 2003. Do strict electoral campaign finance rules limit corruption?, CESifo DICE Report 1, Munich, 24-7.Google Scholar
  37. van Biezen, I. 2003. Financing political parties and election campaigns—guidelines. Integrated project “Making democratic institutions work”. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© European Consortium for Political Research 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto de Ciências SociaisUniversidade de Lisboa (ICS-UL)LisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations