In proclaiming the law “Amendments to the Law on Financing of Political Organisations (Parties)”, which was adopted through the urgent procedure, President of Latvia Egils Levits has provided a comment with his assessment of the law and recommendations for further improvements. The President of Latvia stresses: “I continue to beleive that there is a need for an even more detailed differentiation of the public funding to be allocated for parties by establishing additional criteria that would promote sensible party behaviour and activity also throughout the period between elections.”
In his comment, the President of Latvia recalls that “the increase of state budget financing for political organisations (parties), whilst reducing the possibilities of receiving private donations, has been a necessary decision by the Saeima which will strengthen the democratic system of Latvia in the long-term”.
The President of Latvia writes in the published comment: “Parties underfunded by the state budget and thus dependent on private donors and their interests are too expensive for the state and its taxpayers in the long-term.”
The proclaimed law stipulates that the Corruption Prevention and Combatting Bureau shall take a decision on suspending state budget financing, if: 1) the operation of a political organisation (party) established in the Saeima is terminated; or 2) the number of members of parliament representing the political organisation (party) established in the Saeima has decreased by more than two thirds.
“I believe that this version of the law will achieve its objective – after the elections of the Saeima, a political organisation (party) must effectively represent the interests of its voters and implement its pre-election programme through the work of its parliamentary group in the Saeima. Furthermore, the resilience of political parties, their development and the effectiveness of parliamentary work will also be improved. The support of the Saeima for the adoption of this law could also improve society’s trust in the party system, which is something we all need to promote and strengthen together,” Egils Levits writes.
As regards the norm established in the Rules of Procedure of the Saeima that a parliamentary group shall be the format of joint work by members of the Saeima elected from one list of candidates, the President of Latvia emphasises that “it is unacceptable to interpret the Rules of Procedure in a formal and grammatical way thus assuming that establishing a parliamentary group is a right of members of parliament, rather than an obligation. The Satversme, the Rules of Procedure of the Saeima and the parliamentary traditions of Latvia demand that members of parliament elected from one list of candidates shall create a parliamentary group for the organisation of their work in the parliament. The creation of parliamentary groups and their work in the Saeima ar intrinsically related to legislative norms, as well as parliamentary traditions and fundamental principles in the organisation of parliamentary work. If elected members are unable to create a parliamentary group this, in effect, means that these members of parliament forfeit several parliamentary rights granted to parliamentary groups. This leads to the inability to comprehensively exercise the mandate of popular representative obtained in the elections and to effectively represent the interests of their voters”.
The President of Latvia is very critical of the arguments expressed as to the possibility that a political organisation (party) elected to the 14th convocation of the Saeima may decide to not establish a parliamentary group with a single mercantile objective – to avoid the consequences stipulated in this Law, i.e., losing state funding due to the inability to sustain a viable parliamentary group throughout the term of the convocation of the Saeima: “A deliberate unwillingness or inability to create a parliamentary group after being elected to the Saeima effectively means refusing to represent the interests of your voters even before the work of the Saeima begins.”
Egils Levits points out that, in the event that members of parliament elected from one list of candidates fail to create a parliamentary group, this should be considered as the disintegration of the relevant parliamentary group without ever beginning operation, and thus it should not be eligible for the part of state financing as stipulated in the law. “I see no rationale why a political organisation (party), which, after being elected to the Saeima fails to create a parliamentary group, ought to be provided a better legal and actual position as compared to a political organisation, which, having established a parliamentary group, fails to sustain its stable functioning throughout the duration of the convocation of parliament. In both cases the political organisation (party) should not be eligible to receive the part of state financing for every vote obtained at the last elections of the Saeima,” to comment states.
The President of Latvia is of the opinion that several worthwhile proposals have been tabled during the examination of the law which the legislature ought to take into consideration in order to continue improving the party financing system in the near future.
Egils Levits has especially highlighted the necessity to carefully consider the following directions for improving the regulations:
- improving regulations on how parties report their use of state budget financing. These adjustments should aim to simplify reporting by political organisations (parties), as well as make more detailed information publicly available thus providing a better idea about how financing from the state budget is being used. The current regulations do not preclude parties from voluntarily publishing more in-depth reports about their use of financing, however, experience shows that political organisations (parties) only publish information to the extent that is explicitly stipulated in legislation;
- improving regulations regarding target groups for whom and in what amount political organisations (parties) may use financing received from the state budget in order to ensure that these funds are used for the intended purpose. Allocation of state financing for parties is, in a way, a public procurement of quality work and development by parties which is in the greater public interest. Therefore, the legislature has the right to differentiate regulatory criteria based on which the part of state financing for parties is determined. “I have always emphasised that linking financing only with the results achieved by a party at elections does not fully comply with the actual objective. Criteria ought to be set to link a certain part of state financing for parties with meaningful work throughout the period between elections,” the comment states;
- making a certain amount of financing available also to the parties, whose primary objective is not running in Saeima elections, but rather municipal elections, providing fair development opportunities and ensuring their administrative work during the period between elections.