AS the 15th General Election looms, there is clear public demand for greater accountability and clarity in how politicians finance election campaigns and parties.
What is legitimate political funding, and what is not, however, is unclear because Malaysia does not have a political financing legislation.
The lack of specific laws to regulate financing of political funds could make it difficult for authorities to determine if such contributions are for the stated purposes or for corrupt reasons.
Thankfully, the government has pledged to table a bill in the next parliamentary sitting in October. Regulations and transparency in political financing are high on the global anti-corruption agenda.
For instance, Article 7.3 of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption calls on countries to enhance "transparency in the funding of candidatures for elected public office and where applicable, the funding of political parties".
Malaysia can look at best practices in other countries as it forms its own guidelines for a political financing bill.
Political financing regulatory frameworks must cover private funding and donations, provisions of public funding, limits on spending, and monitoring and oversight.
Private funding in the form of donations, whether from local or foreign sources, constitutes a large part of party and campaign income in many countries.
The absence of regulations on political funding in Malaysia has given rise to a situation where any politician or political party can receive contributions without limit and from sources that are not disclosed.
Without legislation, the giving and receiving of political funds will continue and parties have no obligation to disclose the source or amount unless questioned.
Currently, giving a large amount of money to a politician does not constitute an offence.
To further a case, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the receiver of the donations was in a position to reward or extend certain benefits to the donor, so it would constitute a bribe, or that the money itself was ill-gotten gains, which would fall under the anti-money laundering law.
According to research by International IDEA (The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance), 46 countries ban corporate donations to limit the influence of vested interests.
Furthermore, 88 countries prohibit politicians and parties from receiving political donations from corporations with partial government ownership.
This is to avoid an uneven playing field caused by ruling parties that are able to access these funds.
Indonesia, the Philippines and Timor Leste ban foreign and anonymous donations.
Globally, 67.8 per cent or 122 countries ban anonymous sources and 68.3 per cent ban foreign sources. This is to ensure transparency as well as to prevent foreign influence from hijacking domestic interests.
In addition to donation bans, some countries place a limit on the amount a donor can contribute to political parties or candidates. This is to prevent a few large donors from gaining excessive influence in the politics and decision-making of a nation.
In Malaysia, spending limits are applied only to candidates, not to political parties.
According to the Elections Offences Act, state candidates can spend up to RM100,000 and parliamentary candidates up to RM200,000.
This is considered too low by many politicians and research has indicated that candidates have underreported spending in campaigns.
Globally, 49.2 per cent of countries limit the amount a candidate can spend and 35 per cent limit impose limits on political parties. Putting a cap reduces the unfair advantage of parties or candidates with access to large amounts of money.
Finally, a political financing act needs to have monitoring and strong oversight by independent bodies.
Oversight bodies should cooperate closely with anti-corruption agencies that tackle other regulations relating to money laundering, public procurement and conflict of interest.
In addition, a critical media, educated electorate, rule of law and whistleblower protection are elements that will help ensure political parties and candidates abide by regulations.
The writer is vice-chancellor of the Enforcement, Leadership Management University