Party pooper

Maoist donation drive



Political party funding is a controversial issue around the world. Should the parties be allowed to collect as much fund, from as many donors as they like? After all, if individuals and businesses are ready to contribute willingly, why stop them? Or should party finances be strictly regulated, with caps on how much an individual or business can donate to a party? The worldwide consensus is for the latter course. First, big contributors expect big returns for their favors. When the recipients are in power, they will be expected to cut corners to benefit their benefactors. The second risk is that political parties, instead of serving as articulators of collective public voice, could become mere tools to mint money for their operators. Especially in a country like Nepal where money and muscle are routinely abused to achieve political ends, it is all the more important that party financing be strictly regulated.



This is also the reason the donation drive of the Mohan Baidya-led CPN-Maoist has been so troubling. Everyone knows that their calls for voluntary donations are cover for outright extortion. Any establishment that refuses donations risks serious labor disruptions, even outright closure. The fact that the Baidya-led outfit is yet to formally renounce violence and has solid anti-business reputation makes noncompliance with their demands near suicidal for any business. If the threats by Baidya and Co were tough enough, now the business community finds itself in even deeper water.



The ruling UCPN (Maoist) has embarked on a coercive donation drive of its own ahead of its general convention in February. In case of CPN-Maoist, the business community could complain to the government. But when the lead party in the government itself is the culprit, whom does it turn to for help? Moreover, the latest Maoist donation drive flies in the face of the party’s commitment to more foreign investment, double-digit growth, and economic prosperity. This flagrant breach of trust and blatant abuse of public office could be a deathblow to the business community which is already reeling under militant unionism, severe power crunch and other deleterious effects of years of political instability.



Again, in the absence of laws that cap donations to political parties, there is nothing wrong in any party asking for help. The problem, again, is that these calls for voluntary donations are barely disguised threats: Give us money or face the consequences. If there was a cap on the amount a political party could collect, businesses could at least make a legal case in their defense. Without any such laws, they find themselves in the defensive, and with the party leading the government engaged in outright extortion, they have nowhere to go. But it would be wrong to single out the two Maoists.



Other major parties have engaged in similar coercive tactics in the past, and they are far from paragons of fiscal rectitude. The fact that none of the major parties has audited its books indicates they have something to hide. Unless there is the political will to root out fiscal malpractice in the party system, the country will continue to pay big, including through an irreparable loss to its budding economy.

Related story

EC scraps six political parties