Robyn Pasensie and Minhaj Jeenah from My Vote Counts respond to ANC Spokesperson Pule Mabe saying he tried to use the law as a scapegoat to mask failures within the ANC.

 

In an opinion piece published on News24, ANC Spokesperson Pule Mabe argued that the Political Party Funding Act (PPFA) is to blame for the ANC’s financial crisis. An Act that, he says, harms democratic processes.

Mabe makes these arguments as ANC staff protest over late salary payments and campaigning for leadership positions intensifies ahead of the party’s elective conference in December. Importantly for Mabe, the current Treasurer-General and would-be Deputy-President, Paul Mashatile, is under criticism for leading the party’s finances in this crisis. Mabe is also campaigning for the Treasurer-General position.

READ | OPINION: Pule Mabe – The ANC’s money troubles – what is going on and who is responsible?

Mabe’s comments are filled with conjecture and are short-sighted, attempting to use the party’s crisis to undermine the PPFA.

Mabe presents the PPFA as an obstacle to democracy, arguing that it has affected party finances and harmed “the entire electoral process on which our democracy rests”. He provides no evidence for this except to highlight the ANC’s financial woes prior to the PPFA. He outlines what he considers five flaws in the legislation:

  • The R15 million cap on donations is too low by international standards. 

This is misleading. According to the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, many countries, similar to ours, have caps for the purpose of limiting private influence in politics. Algeria (around R800 000 cap) and the Republic of Congo (around R1.5 million cap) have caps that are pegged to their minimum wage. Morocco has a cap of around R1 million. Further, almost half of European countries and 50% of South American countries have stringent caps on annual donations.

  • The R100 000 reporting threshold is too high and disincentivises smaller donors who rely on anonymity.

Firstly, the state-capture reports show that R100 000 is more than enough to buy influence in politics. Secondly, if donors do make donations because they support the ANC, why would they want to remain anonymous?

  • It outlaws donations from foreign sources.

This is false. The PPFA states that parties may receive foreign funding for political purposes. The DA, for example, disclosed over R6 million in foreign donations since 1 April 2021.

  • The Act disallows donations from private companies that have traded shares held by the state. 

This, too, is untrue. The PPFA clearly only prohibits donations by state-owned enterprises or organs of the state and makes no mention of private companies.

  • Alternative funding mechanisms are not operational.

This is misleading. The Multi-Party-Democracy-Fund is operational, and more than R6 million has been donated to it. Additionally, political parties received public funding of R1.42 billion in 2021/2022.

Mabe draws on these misrepresentations of the Act to further his argument. It’s clear that the purpose of his piece is to use the law as a scapegoat to mask failures within the ANC. Ironically, while he blames the PPFA he also admits that the party’s funding crisis existed before 2017 — four years prior to the PPFA’s implementation.

Mabe also misrepresents the core principles of the PPFA, which does not exist to restrict funds that parties receive. Instead, it exists to:

  • Strengthen the rights of voters: a recent ConCourt judgment highlights that the right to know who funds our politics is central to the right to vote and make informed political decisions.
  • Give effect to “The people should govern”: the State Capture reports illustrate the extent to which private entities use money to buy influence subverting a fundamental democratic principle — the people shall govern.
  • Maintain sovereignty: Imperialist forces often use money to shape policies in countries like ours to serve their narrow foreign policy interests. Limitations on foreign funding are critical to ensuring sovereignty.

In its attempt toward renewal, the ANC needs to reflect on the reasons for its financial crisis seriously. Rather than placing the blame on legislation whose purpose is to deepen democracy, it should consider alternative funding frameworks that don’t undermine democracy.

READ | ANALYSIS: Will parties stand quietly with the ANC on party funding law while publicly condemning it?

The ANC has been consistent in admitting that the main benefactor of loosening the PPFA will be the ANC. Even its most committed members will admit that the ANC will lose power in the near future. Private funders will then seek other amenable avenues to exert influence.

For the ANC to survive, it should push for a funding framework that does not force it to be beholden to private interests. Rather, we need a funding framework with smaller private-funding thresholds, with parties seeking broad-based public support. Political parties’ finances, therefore, will be determined by the size of their support rather than on their ability and willingness to exert influence.

Ultimately, the ANC’s approach to its funding crisis will go a long way in defining its future and the future of our democracy. The party should use this moment to contribute to a political party funding framework that significantly reduces private influence over our politics and increases people’s power.