Democratic Green Party of Rwanda claims foreign donations, a fail in mass mobilization?

Democratic Green Party of Rwanda flag (Photo:Internet).

”There are two things that are important in politics. The first is money –and I can’t remember what the second one is”. Mark Hanna.

Year 2018, Rwanda is preparing legislative election for a fourth time since the enaction of 2003 constitution, that was amended in 2015.
In Rwanda like in others countries in Africa, many  political parties appear  or become active only  during an election. This is the moment that they refresh their membership mobilization strategy, think about their financial capacity, update manifestoes ,... And disappear when the  election  is  over.

As Rwandans count down days to go back to the ballots to vote legislators, Democratic Green Party  of Rwanda (DGPR) plans to challenge sections of the  ORGANIC LAW N° 10/2013/0L OF 11/07/2013  GOVERNING POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS AND POLITICIANS that restrict political parties from accepting foreign donations.

A political organization shall not be allowed to accept donations and bequests from foreigners, foreign business companies, industries and organisations involved in other activities or in which foreigners are shareholders ( Article 24: Official Gazette n° Special of 12/07/2013).

Dr Frank Habineza, The party leader,  said this is unfair and only favours larger parties including the ruling party (he told The Kenyan newspaper, The East African).

Why Laws in some countries prohibit political parties from receiving foreign aids?

Financial constraint is worldwide problem among political organizations especially on African continent. As usual, When financial issue becomes heavier, Some political organizations choose to merge with others or they tend to be moribund.

Aiding political parties is a topic that was discussed about a lot of times,  But according to Mathisen and Svasand,  for opposition  political parties in Africa receiving financial support from  the Western donors has both advantages and disadvantages.

In emerging  democracies:
1) Foreign funding is sometimes  viewed  as an attempt by external actors to a political system to influence the outcome  of national elections and the directions  of political partiesi.:  This type of influence distorts a fundamental democratic principle that the election of representatives should express the political preferences of the politically enfranchised citizens.

2) There is a general  fear  that the political parties’ dependence on external funding might limit or decrease their attachment  to their electorate:
 The social basis for functioning parties and party systems is a well-organised. If parties can rely on foreign funding, there will be no need for parties to connect to civil society.

The argument is that money given directly to the party will create distance between the party and the electorate. The party will be less inclined to represent the views of the citizens, and oppositional parties will have fewer incentives to challenge the government, as the party already is in  a comfortable position.

 3) Party direct funding can reduce internal democracy in the parties:  
When the party leadership has got foreign funds,  They could be  turned into authoritarian leaders  and might follow a  monolithic leadership. As the result,  they  could refuse to entertain criticisms from  fellow party members fearing the exposure of their corrupt practices.

4)Foreign funding could also  lead in to the formation of the so called “party entrepreneurs”:
(i.e. individuals  who establish political parties  to  tap  internationally available funds). Therefore, many ambitious  individuals  would  be encouraged to establish political parties as a short  cut  to  rapid personal  wealth. The result will be a fragmentation of the party system a development hardly conducive to democratic consolidation.

Why Political parties encounter financial instability? 

While funding of political parties is intrinsically understood to be crucial, it nevertheless is an ambiguous concept. With political funding we mean: the way that political parties and individual candidates running for political office raise funds for election campaigns  and, in the case of political parties, for maintaining themselves as organisations.

Un-govern political parties struggle to raise funds in Africa because of various reasons. Some of them are:

 1) Lack of Mass Base: Many of the opposition parties in  Africa  lack  proper  contact with  trade  unions, labor unions, and peasants associations. So the absence of this contact drives the party to the lack of membership fees and members contribution.

2)Uncondusive political environment: Some incumbent governments set a repressive law that constraint political parties to gain funds from donors Or from party believers by harassment and intimidation. In this environment, citizens abstain to give money to political parties fearing their security.

3)Weak organisational structure to collect contribution of members and supporters.

4) Weak of party institutionalized: When the party is weakly institutionalized, means to make a political party as an active institution, It loses presence at the grassroots levels.  The lack of a grassroots penetration effects the level of trust in the party so that they can sponsor it.

Is DGPR failing? 

According to Chege,  one of the weaknesses of  political parties in East Africa is that they are highly fragile and  suffer  from  severe structural  weaknesses.
 If the Democratic Green Party of Rwanda is claiming for being allowed to receive foreign aids, This shows that it is facing problems (maybe intra or inter) that are limiting it from having money.

2003 constitution that was modified in 2005 accepts multipartism democracy and guarants people freedom to adhere political party for their choice. If DGPR points out financial Incapacity since its foundation in 2009 maybe:
-It failed to mobilize mass membership
- It failed to build a strong  institutional structures.
- or it is Built around unconvincing personalities.

No any other alternative to raise fund?

Article 23 says that political parties raise funds from: contributions from its members; donations and bequests; its activities and State grants.
The article above paved the way parties can raise funds but the revenues should sometime be insufficient.

When this situation comes, to raise fund, a political organization can:
1) Form alliances: Undoubtedly, parties enter into alliances  in order to win elections.  Access  to power  often  comes  with  various  privileges,  including  financial  advantages.   In other words, alliances provide  financial  security  for  members  of  the alliance partners.  In addition, in those countries that have an FPTP(First Past The Post) electoral system it tends to be an advantage to run for office as an incumbent.

2) Adhere Patrimonialism way of raising fund: It is the worst accident and the heaviest burden to be the leader,  to be in charge of a day to day life of political party. Getting money when your organization is facing financial instability, you sometime sell your soul to get it.
Patrimonialism way of getting money, a patron rewards his followers with gifts in return  for their loyalty and  support. Here the party can promise some personnel in Or out the party, certain privileges in exchange for money to raise fund.

Conclusion

For Heywood, a political party is a group of people, which  is organized with the aim  of  winning  governmental  power,  by electoral or other means.
Political parties are  very  important for democratization and democratic  consolidation. When you are in road to power,  you face many hindrances include financial instability.

Maybe Democratic Green Party of Rwanda has a reason to claim foreign aid. But let's glance at the Political history of Rwanda.
-Rwanda conducted  multipartism presidential election for the first time in history in 2003 under Presidential Paul Kagame and RPF-Inkotanyi leadership.
-We sold our brains to colonialists,  they exchanged us with ethnic-based ideologies that led us to the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi where by one million were slaughtered.

 After dark history, Rwandans vowed to do whatever it takes to protect their sovereignty. To have political parties that represent our views without any external interference is a sovereignty ingredient too.

Rwandans built roads, strong government institutions from their own solutions. Rwanda is the safest country, the most growing economy from their own solutions.  RPF-Inkotanyi that abolted The 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi are Rwandans.

According to me,  Democratic Green Party of Rwanda should check if Its manifesto and alternative ideas fit aims and expectations Rwandans Because they had already proved that if the idea is good, they vote "Yes" instead of bringing again external actors in politics of Rwanda.

Janvier KARANGWA is a media specialist 
Email: karangwajanvier55@gmail.com
Twitter: @karangwajanvie5