By letting errors in financial reports and quota for women unpunished, the Amnesty PEC undermines even more the credibility of associations.
August 3, 12h02
MÔNICA SODRÉ & LUIZA LACAVA
A threat to women, to the legitimacy of the parties and to democracy itself surrounds the agenda at the National Congress in the reopening of activities after the July recess: taking up the debate on the Constitutional Amendment Proposal (known as PEC) 09/23, the so-called Amnesty PEC. The proposal waives sanctions for any irregularities found in the financial reports of political parties, including the lack of funding for the campaign of women and black people, in the 2022 and previous elections. If approved, the constitutional amendment will waive sanction, for example, for parties that did not comply with the allocation of funds from the electoral funds resources to campaigns of groups considered as minorities. Since behind the scenes, almost no one has admitted complying neither with this rule nor with another which attempts to guarantee greater diversity, the Amnesty PEC has achieved a rare unanimity. Until the Congress recess at the beginning of July, only the Novo Party and federative integration of Psol and Rede had opposed the PEC.
The approval of the Amnesty PEC could mean yet another chapter of a long plot of representativeness crises within political parties. Protectors of democratic interests and regime-stabilizing pillars, parties tend to be, nevertheless, among the least trustworthy institutions in the population’s impressions, along with the National Congress. It is also a symptom that we have less trust in particularly those organizations over which we have the power to choose our representatives.
After the 1964 coup d’état, from the following year on, there were only two parties, the Arena and the MDC. In the 1990 elections, 36 parties were running. Today there are 30. In the last 12 years, between the two censuses, there was a decline of interest which was also reflected in the number affiliated: while the population has grown 6,5% and the electorate, 11%, the number of affiliated people has remained at the same level (15 million).
The population’s distrust regarding political parties and the stagnation of interests are at odds in three ways. Firstly, the importance attributed to them by the law of Political Parties, according to which they are the protectors of the representative system and of the defense of fundamental rights defined by the Constitution. They are also at odds in the importance of the practices. Due to the system of proportionality, which elects most of the legislators, the parties are the main organizers of the parliamentary game. Everything evolves around them. It also includes a lot of money.
For almost sixty years, even though they did not have any representative elected, all parties registered with the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) have received some resources from the Party Fund. In 2013, the Fund of 294 million BRL was divided among the 32 parties at the time. Ten years later, the figures have increased more than fourfold. The attempt to reduce the number of parties instituted the progressive barrier clause, which limits access to the Fund to parties that meet minimum requirements of seats and valid votes in Congress. This 2017 amendment was an important step forward, but not enough to improve the use of public money. In 2022 alone, 24 parties received between 3 million and 150 million BRL. In 2023, 14 of them will receive a combined 1.1 billion BRL.
But that’s not the end of the story. The Electoral Fund jumped from 1.7 million BRL to fund the campaign to 5.7 billion BRL by the election’s window. These have been years of prosperity for party resources. In a 21st century blast, the Senate in 2022, through the Constitutional Amendment 117, made it constitutional and, therefore, it reinforced giving parties the responsibility of encouraging the presence of more women in politics, which should be done in two ways: from one side, the application of at least 5% of resources to party funds in the creation and maintenance of programs to promote and disseminate the political participation of women; from the other side, the sum of the Electoral Fund and the portion of the Party Fund allocated to electoral campaign, as well as free advertising time on radio and television, must be proportional to the number of female candidates, and it cannot be less than 30%.
Now, just over a year after the amendment was approved, the Amnesty PEC seeks to ban any punishment for illegalities committed by the parties up to now. That includes the non-compliance for the transfer of funds, although it’s not limited to it. Signed by more than 1/3 of parliamentarians and more than a half of the parties with seats in the Chamber of Deputies, the PEC in question is a gesture of parliamentary fraternity and shared interests, regardless of ideological differences.
Facing the crisis of party representativeness, paths exist and must be sought. Internal restructuring and changes aiming at increasing the number of women and black candidates have been implemented in some parties, but it still happens in an isolated and incipient way. Gender and race parity in decision-making and executive bodies of the party as well as the limitation of re-appointment in leadership – thus facilitating the emergence of new positions – are good beginnings to promote the internal oxygenation of organizations. Stopping the Amnesty PEC, and all sorts of irregularities and illegalities that it condones, could bring new life into the commitment of political parties with Brazilian society, thus renewing their important and necessary role in democratic regimes.