Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09WINDHOEK272
2009-07-29 11:48:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Windhoek
Cable title:  

PARTY FINANCING OPACITY A HUGE BOON TO SWAPO

Tags:  PGOV WA 
pdf how-to read a cable
R 291148Z JUL 09
FM AMEMBASSY WINDHOEK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 0679
INFO SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L WINDHOEK 000272 


E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/28/2019
TAGS: PGOV WA
SUBJECT: PARTY FINANCING OPACITY A HUGE BOON TO SWAPO

REF: WINDHOEK 118

Classified By: Ambassador Dennise Mathieu Reason 1.4 (b)

C O N F I D E N T I A L WINDHOEK 000272


E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/28/2019
TAGS: PGOV WA
SUBJECT: PARTY FINANCING OPACITY A HUGE BOON TO SWAPO

REF: WINDHOEK 118

Classified By: Ambassador Dennise Mathieu Reason 1.4 (b)


1. (C) Summary: Political parties in Namibia have no legal
requirement to disclose the sources of private domestic
funding, while public funding is dictated by the number of
seats a party holds in the National Assembly. Both systems
heavily benefit the ruling South West African People's
Organization (SWAPO),which has a massive funding advantage
heading into November's national elections. Foreign funding
-- of which SWAPO is widely rumored to benefit -- by law
should be declared, but shortcomings in electoral legislation
mean that parties are not compelled to do so. Pending
amendments to the Electoral Act do not address the financing
issue, suggesting SWAPO most likely will retain its sizable
monetary advantage for several elections to come. End
summary.

--------------
WHAT THE ELECTORAL LAWS SAY ABOUT FINANCING
--------------


2. (U) Namibian electoral law -- particularly the guiding
Electoral Act of 1992 -- says almost nothing about the
regulation of funding for political parties in Namibia.
Parties are not compelled to disclose the identities of
domestic funders, and there are no prohibitions against
parties operating private sector entities to raise funds.
The only portion of the Act that touches upon the funding
issue, Article 46, does note that foreign funding of parties
must be declared. However, the act does not specify how this
must be done, nor does it provide for an enforcement
mechanism.


3. (U) As for public money, Namibia since 1997 has had in
place a system that annually awards parties public money
based on their representation in the National Assembly.
Since 1997, the government has awarded approximately N$190
million (more than $20 million) to political parties, nearly
three-quarters of which has gone to SWAPO. SWAPO alone was
awarded almost N$27 million (almost $3 million) in 2008,
dwarfing the slightly more than N$8 million received by all
other parties combined. Parties have no obligation to
disclose what they do with these funds once they receive them.

--------------
IN PRACTICE, DECK STACKED IN SWAPO'S FAVOR
--------------


4. (C) The ultimate result of the opaque nature of private
funding and proportionality of public funding is that SWAPO
can employ an overwhelming advantage at campaign time,
according to several local political commentators. Graham

Hopwood of the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR)
told Poloff on July 23 that while no one knows the extent of
SWAPO's private financing, it far outstrips even their
sizable public funding. First, most private businesses in
Namibia clearly favor SWAPO given its status as ruling party.
Secondly, SWAPO reaps benefits from its private sector
holding companies, Zebra Holdings and Kalahari Holdings.
Kalahari, for example, has interests in printing, transport,
and other firms, including half of local satellite
broadcaster DSTV. While noting that he could not
substantiate the rumor, Hopwood said he has heard SWAPO earns
more annually from its DSTV dividends than it gets from the
national fiscus. Lastly, SWAPO -- and in particular
President Pohamba -- frequently uses state resources in
campaigning. Pohamba, for example, will use the presidential
plane on campaign pit stops. The legality of such moves is
not clearly spelled out in the law.


5. (C) As for foreign funding, the system currently in place
is unenforceable and SWAPO in particular gains from foreign
donations. Only one sizable donation -- $N240,000 to SWAPO
in 2003 from the Chinese Communist Party -- has ever been
publicly acknowledged (see Reftel for more information on
Chinese support for SWAPO),while the Chinese Communist
Party, Angola's ruling MPLA, and even South Africa's ruling
ANC are widely rumored to have financed SWAPO in recent
years. China in particular is rapidly expanding its business
linkages in Namibia, so large contributions to SWAPO would
make sense from a business standpoint. SWAPO is not the only
recipient of funds, however. Leaders of smaller opposition
parties have told Hopwood of donations from political parties
in Scandanavia and from the British Labor Party, for instance.


6. (C) The lack of a mechanism in which to declare foreign
funding is a huge impediment to making this information
public, and until the law is made more clear, it is unlikely
that parties will seek to follow it. Anton Bosl, head of the
Konrad Adenauer Stiftung's Namibia office, told Poloff on
July 22 that he recently went to the Electoral Commission to
ask about foreign donations, but they told him they had no
information and were not the right people to help him. Bosl
said he had no clue to whom to turn otherwise.

--------------
OPPOSITION FACES UPHILL FIGHT IN NOVEMBER
--------------


7. (C) Hopwood and others see little chance of the political
opposition making a dent in SWAPO's support in the upcoming
November elections, in large part due to their severe funding
disadvantage. The new Rally for Democracy and Progress, a
SWAPO breakaway formed last year, has no seats in the
National Assembly and will therefore not receive any public
funding. Estelle de Bruyn, a political reporter at Die
Republikein, noted that the party is currently being run out
of party leader Hidipo Hamutenya's Windhoek house on a
shoestring budget. The party has reportedly received some
backing from northern businessmen, but it is apparently
nowhere near enough to properly compete with SWAPO.

--------------
CHANGE UNLIKELY ANYTIME SOON
--------------


8. (C) Pending amendments to the Electoral Act -- which is
still in the National Council -- contained no language on
party funding, and Hopwood said that despite the shortcomings
of the system, there is little prospect for reform due to
lack of political will. SWAPO clearly does not want to
change a system that works to its benefit, but Hopwood also
noted that the opposition also does not want more
transparency around funding. Smaller parties do not want to
expose their donors to SWAPO scrutiny, which could cause them
to lose out on government contracts or even make them targets
for retribution. Ultimately, while Hopwood's IPPR does try
to shed light on the issue, party financing is not a
hot-button political issue for the majority of Namibians.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


9. (C) Namibia's current campaign laws will make it
difficult, if not impossible, for smaller opposition parties
to take on SWAPO for the foreseeable future without some sort
of change to campaign finance laws. Even with resonant
campaign messages, opposition parties will find it difficult
to campaign in a country as geographically vast as Namibia
without campaign resources. As long as it remains in power,
SWAPO's use of holding companies will generate significant
revenues that, even without public funding, will dwarf the
rest of the opposition combined.


MATHIEU