Opinion Elections awash in cash

In 1990,the Dinesh Goswami Committee on Electoral Reforms recommended state funding of elections in kind. After a decision taken at an all-party meeting in May 1998,the Centre constituted a committee on state funding of elections under the chairmanship of the late Indrajit Gupta. It submitted a report regarding the pattern of state funding in other countries and suggested proposals for providing state funding to candidates of recognised political parties.

The Law Commission of India in its 170th report on Reform of the Election Laws (1999) recommended that in the present circumstances,only partial state funding could be contemplated,as a first step towards total state funding.

The second Administrative Reform Commission (ARC) in its fourth report observed that in order to eradicate the major source of political corruption,there is a compelling case for state funding of elections. Further,it recommended that a system for partial state funding should be introduced to reduce the scope of illegitimate and unnecessary funding of elections.

The EC convened a meeting of all recognised political parties on February 15,2006,to elicit their views on the proposal on state funding,sent by the Centre,in which representatives of all the six national parties and 28 of 44 state parties participated. The EC noted that though there was unanimity on the need for curbing the role of money power in elections,no consensus could be arrived at on the suggestions made by the government.

The EC has opined that the present proposal for state funding will not address the issue of money power in elections. It has further stated that the proposal,if implemented in the present form,will only add to the resources available to the candidates of recognised political parties at the cost of the state exchequer. For addressing the real issue,there have to be radical changes in the provisions relating to receipt of funds by parties and in the manner in which such funds are spent by them so as to provide for complete transparency. If any positive result is aimed to be achieved through state funding,then the funding should be total without leaving any loophole for additional spending by candidates or parties.

In India,one of the sources of funding of political parties is private donations. Internationally,there are a few broad patterns of state funding for political parties and elections. One is the minimalist pattern,wherein elections alone are partially subsidised,usually through specific grants or state-rendered services. Candidates are accountable to the public authority for observance,reporting and disclosure of expenditure for the limited election period. The UK,Ireland,Australia,New Zealand and Canada are examples of this pattern.

The second pattern is the one followed in the US is where election funding is largely private and subjected to strict reporting and disclosure requirements as well as limits on contributions. A comprehensive paper on the campaign finance in foreign countries published in 1999 by the International Foundation for Election Systems says that the system of campaign finance regulation in the US is focused primarily on seeking full public disclosure of funds raised and spent by the candidates for political office and their campaign committees,political parties and independent political action committees.

In contrast to the US,the Great Britain System of Campaign Finance Regulation is relatively weak. Individual candidates do face spending limits but the party does not. Candidates,parties and political committees are not required to disclose contributions and expenditures.

A major concern about the high cost of polls is that it prevents parties and candidates with modest financial resources from being competitive in elections. It is also feared that if candidates need to raise funds from a variety of sources,then their policy decisions after being elected as policy-makers may be somewhat biased in favour of groups that fund them. State funding of elections (in various forms) has been proposed as a potential solution to this problem.

There are divergent views on state funding of elections. I think state funding should be provided for women and SC/ST candidates,to start with. Articles 330 and 332 provides that seats shall be reserved for SCs and STs in the Lok Sabha and legislative assemblies in proportion to their population in the respective states. But further initiatives are to be taken for their overall development.

It may be mentioned that the ever-increasing cost of contesting elections dampen the spirit of SCs and STs in coming forward and enjoying the optimum benefit of constitutional provisions. Persons belonging to these marginalised sections find it difficult to bridge the huge gap of funding of elections. This may,as part of the constitutional commitment,be met by the government.

The writer is Union law minister