ANC, EFF and IFP want looser donation disclosure laws in South Africa

Several political parties and interest groups have called for increasing South Africa’s political donation threshold, which would significantly impact party funding transparency.

The Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs is reviewing submissions on a resolution to grant the President the authority to set the upper limit and minimum disclosure threshold for donor funds that a political party or independent candidate may receive annually from a single donor.

Currently, the Political Party Funding Act (PPFA) sets donation thresholds and requirements for parties to declare their external income. This includes a R15-million a year limit from a single donor and a R100,000 declaration threshold.

The Electoral Matters Amendment Act (EMAA), signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa on 7 May 2024, amended the PPFA to allow independent candidates to run for positions in the National Assembly and provincial legislatures and access the Multi-Party Democracy Fund.

However, it contained amendments that removed the disclosure thresholds in the PPFA, and the National Assembly failed to pass a resolution to close the gap before the elections.

This resulted in a prolonged period of, as advocacy group My Vote Counts (MVC) described it, “party funding lawlessness.”

These limits were reinstated by the Western Cape High Court.

Now, the draft resolution that the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs is working on is meant to address these gaps, and it has been receiving (some very opposing) proposals.

Call for more leeway

The committee received proposals from some political parties, namely the ANC, EFF, and IFP – who called for raising the limit and thresholds.

Looking at the proposals from parties wanting to increase the limits and thresholds, these include:

Others, including the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) called for doubling the limit to R30 million.

The ANC and COSATU argued that the existing R15 million upper limit on donations does not realistically reflect the operational and electoral costs they face, especially with rising inflation.

The ANC also called for an increase of the threshold, lamenting the ‘administrative burden’ of detailed disclosures, particularly for parties with extensive organisational structures.

The IFP argued that it is highly challenging to run an organization and its campaigns solely on the IEC subsidy and membership fees.

They said that while transparency is crucial for both public and private donations, it is important to recognise “that some private donors may hesitate to have their names publicly disclosed, potentially leading them to withdraw their financial support.”

The EFF proposed a significant jump to R100 million, arguing a need to support expensive daily operations and election campaigns.

The EFF also suggested increasing the minimum declaration threshold by 900% to R1 million, arguing that the current level exposes smaller parties and their donors to “unfair scrutiny and potential backlash.”

Don’t raise it

While some called for the loosening of laws to allow for more funds and less transparency, others fiercely opposed these calls; calling for either lowering the limits, maintaining the threshold, or getting red of the threshold altogether to require full disclosure.

Keeping or lowering the limits:

My Vote Counts (MVC) specifically argues that a higher limit would allow affluent individuals or entities to exert disproportionate influence on a party’s decisions and policies, potentially undermining democratic principles and prioritising the interests of a select few over the broader electorate.

It was MVC’s legal efforts that led to the mandating disclosure of private political party funding, which resulted in the enactment of the PPFA in the first place.

The Southern African Catholic Bishops’ Conference (SACBC) echoes this concern, advocating for retaining the current R15 million limit to prevent donors from unduly shaping party agendas

Maintain the threshold:

The SACBC advocated for retaining the current R100,000 threshold, arguing that it balances between ensuring transparency and aligning with voters’ right to know about donor influence.

Eliminate the threshold/full disclosure:

Meanwhile, MVC and Cosatu strongly advocate for full disclosure of all political donations, regardless of the amount.

They argue that transparency is crucial for holding political parties accountable to the public and ensuring that voters are informed about the sources of party funding.

Raising the disclosure threshold would obscure information about smaller donations, potentially concealing attempts to influence parties through a series of donations below the reporting limit.

Other arguments

Independent election and political analyst Michael John Atkins argued that the National Assembly resolution does not need to specify a fixed amount for the disclosure threshold, allowing the President to determine the appropriate limit.

What’s next?

The Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs will review the motion on the donation limit and disclosure threshold due to mixed public opinions and unclear reasoning behind the current figures.

Committee Chair Mosa Chabane emphasised the need for a scientific study by the Parliamentary Budget Office and National Treasury to guide the motion, balancing transparency with political parties’ operational needs.

The committee stressed that the motion should be fact-based, reflecting inflationary impacts and the costs of running campaigns and party affairs in the current environment.

Read: The law dividing the GNU – and the clock is ticking