The need for transparency in party financing

As more details emerge about the misdeeds of business groups like S Alam following the fall of the Awami League government, the question remains how closely the fates of these business tycoons were intertwined with those of the political party at the centre of Bangladesh's authoritarian turn. The connection has long been clear, but hopefully the causal link will become clearer as further investigations progress. But if we can only uncover the details of the financial relationships between industrial groups and political parties after the dramatic resignations of prime ministers in the wake of mass uprisings, it does not bode well for the state of accountability in the country. And yet these relationships have long shaped our country's fate, allowing political parties to hide behind money to undermine democracy – and disempower millions of the poor and powerless.

Money plays a central role in politics, but if we are to avoid it becoming a poison as it has in the past, the transitional government's democracy-oriented reform agenda must include robust mechanisms to ensure financial transparency in Bangladesh's politics.

Currently, political finance – or more specifically, campaign finance – in Bangladesh is regulated by the Representation of the People's Order (RPO) of 1972. It provides guidelines to candidates on how to manage and report their finances and restricts both candidates and parties to certain spending caps on election campaigns. According to the recent update to the rules, candidates are not allowed to spend more than 25 lakh taka on elections, while political parties are limited to 4.5 crore taka if they field over 200 candidates (less if they field fewer).

Anyone familiar with the previous “elections” between 2014 and 2024 knows that it is virtually impossible that these spending limits were met, even though the parties claimed on paper that they had complied with them. In 2018, for example, the Awami League claimed to have spent 1.05 crore taka on the election, the BNP said it spent 1.11 crore taka, and the Jatiya Party managed to do it for just 4.52 lakh taka. The reason they could get away with these blatant fabrications, as reported by Transparency International, was explained by Election Commission officials to The Daily Star in a report ahead of the 2024 elections – when they admitted that the Election Commission has no effective means of checking whether parties are complying with these limits.

It is clear that if we want transparent political financing, the Electoral Commission must be given all the resources and independence to implement the RPO. It may also need to implement a better version of the RPO that covers the entire political process. In future, the Electoral Commission must have access to forensic accountants and the power to request financial records from political donors. Every step must be taken to make these records as accessible to voters as possible, with the media proactively highlighting any discrepancies and suspicious connections in these records.

This is not to say that business organizations or wealthy individuals should be banned from donating to political parties. They have the right to participate in politics, and donations can be a way for them to remain involved. However, voters should know who is supporting a candidate financially.

As reliance on small financial contributions from supporters and party members and voluntary participation in political work has diminished, it has become a global trend for political parties to turn to large corporations for funding. The larger the corporation, the higher its financial contribution, often resulting in excessive influence on policymaking. Separate regulations are needed to protect elected officials from the influence of donors, but voters must be aware of the risks they take when voting for a candidate supported by a particular corporation.

This shift towards a more open environment regarding access to campaign finance information could even deter political parties from entering into dangerous deals with businessmen and conglomerates. It could encourage them to return to a politics that connects them with the people and relies on supporters and members to fund their basic functions. The worrying trend of the majority of members of parliament being businessmen underscores the unhealthy intertwining of business and politics – a trend that must be reversed.

Campaign finance is a central part of political financing, but there is much more to it than that. Political parties in Bangladesh and around the world need to remain relevant outside of election cycles through media and social media, which also costs money. Political financing regulation should not hinder the survival of political parties. They must have access to legal, transparent and democratically oriented methods of fundraising.

In Germany, elected officials are asked to give a portion of their salary to the party that nominated them. This process has both advantages and pitfalls. In many countries, including the UK, Sweden, Spain, Canada and Australia, the state provides direct funds to political parties once they qualify for them through elections. Some countries support political parties indirectly by allowing them to use state resources such as state media. Foreign aid to political parties can be a contentious issue, but given the large Bangladeshi diaspora, a mechanism could be created so that their contributions support democracy without inviting foreign interference.

Ultimately, those who fund politics will always have influence over political parties, and should a candidate be elected, that influence will trickle down into government. Whether it's a huge corporation or ordinary citizens paying into the party coffers, they will always expect their money to carry weight, which is why transparency in this process is paramount. Every penny raised and spent by political parties or campaigns must be publicly available so voters can make informed decisions.

The UN's focus on artificial intelligence for this year's International Day of Democracy is significant for Bangladesh, where technology could help make democratic processes more transparent and efficient. But the foundation for such progress lies in a resource that has somehow become increasingly scarce: common sense.

Azmin Azran is digital features coordinator at the Daily Star.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author.

Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, comment and analysis from experts and professionals. If you would like to submit your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, please see our submission guidelines.