Edward Mumbuu
Lahja Nashuuta
Over the past five years, political parties represented in Parliament have received a cumulative N$592 million from Treasury, based on the seats they have in the country’s bicameral parliament system, official documents reveal.
This is despite the fact that without the requisite powers to keep parties in check, there is little to no accountability for how these millions of taxpayer dollars are expended, the Electoral Commission of Namibia (ECN) has conceded.
As such, most parties spent the millions at a whim, including on nice-to-have items such as purchasing vehicles for leaders and their spouses; dishing out loans; paying leaders double salaries; and, in some instances, paying politicians whose roles have been reduced to sitting at home since being ejected from the National Assembly about two years ago.
Some parties are also using taxpayer funds to reward their politicians for party work, a direct contravention of the Electoral Act of 2014, which directs how funding received from the State purse may be used.
It says funds allocated to a political party may not be used directly or indirectly for the purposes of paying any remuneration, fee, reward, perquisite or other benefits to any person representing the political party in parliament, any regional council, or local authority council. The Popular Democratic Movement (PDM) has been using taxpayers’ funds to repay monies it reportedly borrowed from its politicians to finance its political activities between 2013 and 2019, it was reported.
Just recently, the Independent Patriots for Change (IPC) bought over a hundred vehicles estimated to cost over N$50 million. They never disclosed where the money came from, apart from saying the fleet was bought with funds donated by party members, sympathisers and followers.
Swapo was also accused of benefiting from the Fishrot corruption scandal, allegations that the party repeatedly denied. The party has likewise been at sixes and sevens to explain how it is financing the mega-construction of its headquarters in Katutura. The state-of-the-art building will reportedly cost Swapo more than N$1 billion upon completion.
Political analysts and policy experts are now calling for transparency and accountability from political parties, whether they are represented in parliament or not.
Millions
Information obtained from Treasury shows that during the 2019/20 financial year (FY), political parties received N$116.5 million from the public wallet.
In the following FY, 2020/21, the amount paid to political parties was N$102.8 million.
Back during the 2021/22 FY, political party funding increased to N$103.9 million.
The amount would increase to N$119.4 million in the following fiscal year.
The highest funding was during the just-ended 2023/24 FY, when political parties received N$149.5 million.
These funds are disbursed quarterly. Funds paid to a political party are deposited in a separate banking account opened by the political party concerned with a banking institution in Namibia.
Seats
The political parties reviewed by New Era for 2020 include the ruling Swapo Party with 90 seats, 63 in the National Assembly (NA), and 27 in the National Council (NC).
The PDM has a combined 18 seats across both Houses. The third-largest recipient is the Landless People’s Movement (LPM), with 10 seats in both Houses: four in the NA and six in the NC. With four seats, the United Democratic Front (UDF) is the fourth-biggest recipient of public funding, followed by the National Unity Democratic Organisation (Nudo) with threat seats. The Republican Party (RP), All People’s Party (APP), Namibia Economic Freedom Fighters (NEFF), and Panduleni Itula’s Independent Patriots for Change (IPC) have two seats each. Namibia’s oldest party, Swanu, the Christian Democratic Voice (CDV), Rally for Democracy and Progress (RDP), the Rundu Rural constituency’s independent councillor Paulus Mbangu, andindependent candidate in Zambezi Ivene Visitor Kabunga each have one seat. Depending on the total amount dispensed during a given financial year, political parties share the amount equally, based on the number of seats they have.
In essence, the more seats a party has across the NA and NC, the more money it collects from Treasury.
Cashing in
Last year, Swapo received N$97.5 million from Treasury.
They were followed by PDM in second, who pocketed N$19.5 million. In third was the LPM. The orange army, which has in recent times been at war with itself, received N$10.8 million last year. Following them in fourth was the green and white flag of the UDF, with N$4.3 million. The Utjiua Muinjangue-led Nudo collected N$3.2 million from the State’s purse. Meanwhile, the Itula army of patriots, the IPC, the red-beret NEFF under Epaphras Mukwiilongo’s stewardship, Henk Mudge’s RP, and the Nangolo Shuumbwa-led APP received N$2.2 million each last year. Based on their single seats, the rest of the parties and individuals got N$1.1 million each.
Between 2015 and 2020, taxpayers coughed up N$679.5 million on political parties.
Transparency
In the absence of the ECN’s power to hold political parties accountable, commentators have suggested an array of interventions to ensure that funds allocated to parties are put to good use and accounted for.
One of those who added their voice to the discourse was Institute for Public Policy Research executive director Graham Hopwood, who said it is the ECN’s responsibility to ensure there is compliance with the law. “They should publicise the names of the parties which are not submitting their reports and publishing their accounts on time. In addition, the punishments outlined in the law should be applied if parties are non-compliant,” he suggested.
Asked what parties ought to do to assure taxpayers that their hard-earned monies are utilised prudently, he said: “They can publish their own accounts on their party websites, and list their major donors above a certain amount.”
Political watchdog
Meanwhile, fellow analyst Wade Henckert finds it necessary to create other systems to guarantee responsibility and openness regarding political party financing.
“A possible strategy would be to create an impartial auditing organisation with the express responsibility of keeping an eye on how political parties are using public cash. This organisation needs to have the power to impose sanctions for any financial abuse or misappropriation, as well as to carry out routine audits and investigations. Transparency and accountability can also be improved by proposing legislation requiring political parties to provide comprehensive financial reports,” Henkert added.
From where he stands, it is imperative that political parties take proactive steps to reassure the public about how taxpayer money is being spent. This, he said, can entail routinely releasing comprehensive financial records, revealing the sources of support, and itemising expenses. “To guarantee the appropriate management of public finances, parties should embrace good governance principles such as internal financial controls and supervision procedures. Additionally, cultivating an environment that is transparent and receptive to public queries about party finances can support the development of taxpayer confidence and trust,” he continued.
Alternative
According to the expert, alternative party funding models exist, different from the one currently used by Namibia.
“There are other methods of political fundraising available which can help offset the drawbacks of the current set-up. Public financing based on several variables such as party membership counts, electoral results and compliance with accountability and transparency requirements, is one such strategy. This strategy encourages prudent financial management, while guaranteeing that parties receive financing appropriate to the degree of public support for them,” he noted. Additionally, parties can diversify their revenue sources, and lessen their reliance on government support by looking into cutting-edge funding mechanisms like matching funds or crowdsourcing for small donations.
Another funding model is direct allocation.
Through this model, the government would allocate a set amount of money to each registered political party, regardless of their parliamentary presence. This ensures a baseline level of funding for all parties, and promotes participation.
The other is matching funds.
Here, the government matches private donations received by political parties up to a certain limit. This encourages private contributions, while reducing dependence on large donors. One other is the taxpayer check-off. “Taxpayers can choose to allocate a portion of their taxes to a specific political party during tax filing. This allows citizens to directly support parties they align with,” he proffered. “Political parties can collect regular membership fees from their supporters. This fosters a sense of ownership and engagement among party members. Allow private donations, with limitations on the amount a single donor can contribute. This can prevent undue influence by wealthy individuals or corporations.”
Do more
Namibia should take further steps to improve its laws and procedures governing political fundraising, such as putting in place stringent rules for political donation disclosure, including restrictions on the quantity and origins of contributions.
The country must likewise increase the engagement of civil society in the surveillance of political finances by means of activism, research and citizen oversight programmes, Henkert proposed. “[Namibia must consider] bolstering legal mechanisms to hold people accountable for cases of embezzlement or corruption involving public monies given to political parties,” he further stated.
Achilles heel
Earlier this year, the ECN said for it to hold political parties accountable, the Electoral Act needs to be amended to give it the requisite powers. “To ensure compliance with funding regulations, the ECN may need enhanced investigative powers, stricter enforcement mechanisms, and the authority to impose penalties on non-compliant parties and individuals,” said ECN chief electoral and referenda officer Petrus Shaama.
Presently, such powers are not vested with the commission. “On the contrary, we also need to be clear if it is in the interest of the commission to have those powers when it is not responsible for funding political parties,” he told this publication.