Several election monitoring organisations have raised concerns pertaining to the recent Regulation of Election Expenditure Bill, which is being debated in Parliament today (19 Jan.).
Accordingly, a collective of election monitoring organisations comprising of Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL), People’s Action for Free and Fair Elections (PAFFREL), the Centre for Monitoring Election Violence (CMEV) and Institute for Democratic Reforms and Electoral Studies (IRES) have raised concerns regarding several loopholes in the Bill, emphasizing that it remains inadequate.
Despite the group having campaigned for such a law for several years now, issuing a statement, TISL noted that a law being brought to regulate the role of money in election campaigns must be one that prevents undue influence and creates a levelled playing field for all competitors, including novel entrants and underrepresented parties.
“To be effective, the law should also provide for a robust monitoring and enforcement mechanism by both the authorities and citizens”, the statement further read.
Thus, they deemed the relevant Bill which was Gazetted on 29 November 2022, and is being debated in Parliament today, inadequate, stating that although it has banned contributions from various parties, it fails to impose any limit on how much funding a candidate, party or independent group can receive from any source, thereby allowing for undue influence.
The Bill bans campaign contributions from several parties, including foreign governments, corporate bodies registered outside Sri Lanka, companies with foreign shareholding and anonymous donors.
Commenting further on the inadequacies of the Bill, it was highlighted that a sufficient monitoring mechanism has also not been set out within its framework, while it also fails to prevent spending by political parties and third parties, on candidates.
Although the Bill foresees the allocation of an authorized amount as the spending limit for a candidate at each election, and requires for candidates to submit audited accounts to the Election Commission, it does not prevent spending by political parties and third parties, on candidates.
“An effective law would require maintenance and disclosure of separate all accounts of candidates, parties or independent groups to the ECSL, and would also make such information digitally accessible to the public, enabling easy scrutiny, and an opportunity to digitally identify irregularities”, TISL stated with regard to what, ideally, should have been done.
Thus, the collective called on the government to close the aforementioned loopholes and to engage in a consultative process with the public, as opposed to rushing its passage in Parliament.
“A weak regulatory system can lead to a further deterioration of people’s trust in politics and the legitimacy of the electoral process, and will not achieve the objectives of introducing such a law”, they warned, while reiterating that the introduction of such a law should not be used as a reason to delay the holding of the local government elections.
