Learn more

composite
48
48

Bosnia and Herzegovina

In law
73
In practice
35

Similar to many other Eastern European countries, Bosnia has created a sophisticated political finance regulatory system. In practice, however, de facto realities often do not align with the legal framework. In law, direct public funding exists for both parties and candidates, but allocations are not always made in accordance with the legal formula, and details on disbursements are published only long after money is distributed. Likewise, in law, parties are granted free, equitable access to public media during campaigns, but in practice, the time afforded to different parties frequently fails to accord with the legal requirements Furthermore, non-financial state resources are often abused during campaigns. Contributions and expenditures are highly regulated, though cash donations are not limited in any way. In practice, these limits were regularly contravened during the 2010 elections. Parties are required to report on their finances before and after elections, as well as annually. In practice, reports are often filed late, or not at all, and some contributions are frequently omitted. The Central Elections Commission (CEC) only publishes extracts of filed reports, so limited political finance information is available to the public. Despite reports of third party activity, the independent electioneering of such actors is not regulated by law. The CEC is granted strong legal powers to monitor and enforce political finance, but its ability to rigorously enforce political finance legislation is constrained by a lack of capacity and deficits in operational transparency. Though the CEC imposes sanctions, in practice, parties continue to violate the law, especially where reporting requirements are concerned, on a regular basis. Until more intimidating sanctions are legally defined, and the CEC is given the practical capacity to carry out its remit, enforcement may continue to suffer.

  • expand button!

    Direct and Indirect Public Funding

    More about category
    composite
    53
    • expand button!
      Direct Public Funding
      More about category
      • expand button!
        1
        Score
        YES
        In law, there is direct public funding for electoral campaigns.More about indicator

        Political parties in BiH are financed from the budgets at various levels in BiH (the level of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the level of two entities - Republic of Srpska and Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the cantonal level - i.e. 10 cantons in Federation of BiH, the municipal level and the level of Brcko District) and this is thus regulated with laws on all these different levels of government. The distribution of public funds and models of financing are regulated by the Law on Political Party Financing of BiH, the Law on Political Party Financing from the Budgets of the Republic, Cities and Municipalities of RS, and the Law on Political Party Financing of Brcko District. The Federation of BiH does not have a separate legislation that would regulate criteria for distribution of political parties, but the rules from laws on budget execution are applied on the level of FBiH, 10 cantons and municipalities in FBiH. The right to funds from the budgets is exercised by political parties, independent candidates, lists and coalitions who have their representatives in the parliaments. The laws do not differentiate the levels of elections (i.e. local or general), nor between the presidential and parliamentary elections, since General elections in BiH encompass the national, entity, cantonal and district elections for presidency and parliaments at the same time.

        The Law on Political Party Financing of BiH provides for the financing of parliamentary groups and independent candidates in the Parliament BiH and does not differentiate between general and campaign funding (the law instead prescribes that the funds can be used for the purposes of achieving goals set by the parties in their programs and statutes) while the RS Law on Political Party Financing from the Budget of RS and Municipal Budgets states that the apportioned budget funds serve for regular financing and the election campaign, and prescribes overall amounts separately. The Federation of BiH has never adopted legislation that would prescribe and define the distribution of public funds to political parties, but instead these funds are allocated from FBiH, cantons and municipalities according to the laws on execution of the budgets, meaning that there is no separation of funds for regular and campaign financing.

        The funds at the BiH level are distributed in a way that 30 percent of the total amount dedicated to the parliamentary groups will be distributed equally, 60 percent will be distributed proportionally according to the number of seats each parliamentary group holds at the time of distribution, while 10 percent will be distributed to the parliamentary groups according to the number of seats belonging to the less represented gender. At the RS level, 20% is distributed equally, and 80% proportionally to the number of mandates, and this law also prescribes that if the member of the parliament or council leaves the party during their mandate, the funds predicted for their seat are kept by the party.

        In general, the public funds are distributed based on the number of mandates and the legislation is not harmonized on all levels in terms of separating funds for regular and campaign financing. Additionally, since the laws and bylaws on national and FBiH level do not predict separate funds for election campaigns, the first-time candidates who run individually and are candidates for the positions on national, FBiH, cantonal or municipal level in FBiH, will not be eligible for public funding , i.e. only if they are already independent parliament members they will receive these funds as a part of their regular financing.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where there is direct public funding for both political parties and individual candidates to campaign. A 100 also applies where only one of the two actors can be elected and, therefore, only one is entitled to direct public funding.

        A MODERATE score is earned where per law only one of the two actors (either political parties or individual candidates) is allocated direct public funding to campaign, even though both can be elected.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Financing of Political Parties of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2012, Article 7. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. The Law on Financing of Political Parties from the budget of Republic, cities and municipalities of Republika Srpska, 2008, Articles 2, 3 and 5. Available at: http://www.podaci.net/gBiH/propis/Zakono_finansiranju/Z-fpsbrg03v0865.html
        3. Law on Financing of Political Parties of Brcko District BiH, 2004, 2007 and 2007, available at: a). http://www.skupstinabd.ba/zakoni/101/b/Zakon%20o%20financ.politickih%20stranaka%20u%20Brcko%20DC-Sl.glasnik%20Brcko%20DC,br.29-04.pdf b). http://www.skupstinabd.ba/zakoni/149/Zakon%20o%20izmj.%20Zakona%20o%20fin.pol.stranaka-%20B.pdf
      • expand button!
        2
        Score
        YES
        In law, there is a transparent and equitable mechanism to determine direct public funding for electoral campaigns.More about indicator

        The national Law on Political Party Funding states that the funds from the national level budget are predicted for political parties, coalitions of political parties and independent candidates that are represented in the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as parliamentary groups, i.e. parliamentary clubs and delegates in the House of Representatives. These funds are allocated for regular financing, but can be used for the purpose of election campaigns, since the law states that the funds can be used for the purposes of achieving goals set by the parties in their programs and statutes. The overall funds cannot exceed 0,2% of the budget of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and are distributed in a way that 30 percent of the total amount dedicated to the parliamentary groups will be distributed equally, 60 percent will be distributed proportionally according to the number of seats each parliamentary group holds at the time of distribution, while 10 percent will be distributed to the parliamentary groups according to the number of seats belonging to the less represented gender.

        Direct public funds are also allocated from the budget of entities, cantons and municipalities. The Law on financing of political parties from the budget of Republic, cities and municipalities of Republika Srpska regulates the allocation of funds from this entity. It predicts funds for political parties that have representatives in the entity or municipal assembly; independent representatives who were elected as independent candidates; political parties, lists of independent candidates and independent candidates with verified election lists; and registered coalitions with verified unified election lists. This law predicts funds for covering regular costs of parties, coalitions and independent representatives; covering the costs of election campaigns; and covering the costs of the work of parliamentary groups. The overall funds for regular financing cannot be less than 0,2% of the overall budget income of the Republic of Srpska from the previous year, while the funds for election campaigns are set as minimum 0,05% of the overall budget income of the Republic of Srpska from the previous year. The law states that the funds are distributed according to the election legislation. However, the Election Law does not regulate this. Additionally, there are no maximum limits for funds distributed from the RS budget neither for regular, nor campaign financing.

        The entity of Federation of BiH has never adopted a legislation that would prescribe the criteria for direct public funding of parties and candidates/representatives, but the distribution of funds is planned and carried out according to the laws on execution of the budgets, and there is no separation of funds for regular and campaign financing. The criteria here are arbitrary, even though the largest apportion of funds come from this entity - from the entity, cantonal and municipal level.

        The funds from the budget of Brcko District predict separate financing for election campaigns, in the overall amount of 0,3% of the District budget or 60.000 KM (30.000 EUR cca) and all political parties are eligible for these funds, in the maximum amount of 4.000 KM (2.000 EUR cca).

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) direct public funding for political parties and individual candidates' electoral campaigns is allocated through a clearly defined calculation mechanism that is transparent and equitable, and 2) there are clearly defined eligibility criteria.

        A MODERATE score is earned where direct public funding for political party and individual candidates' electoral campaigns is allocated through a clearly defined calculation mechanism that is transparent and equitable, but eligibility criteria are not clearly defined.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Financing of Political Parties of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2012, Article 7. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. The Law on financing of political parties from the budget of Republic, cities and municipalities of Republika Srpska, 2008, Articles 2, 3 and 5. Available at: http://www.podaci.net/gBiH/propis/Zakono_finansiranju/Z-fpsbrg03v0865.html
        3. Law on Financing of Political Parties of Brcko District BiH, 2004, 2007 and 2007, available at: http://www.skupstinabd.ba/zakoni/101/b
      • expand button!
        3
        Score
        75
        In practice, to what extent is the mechanism to determine direct public funding for electoral campaigns transparent, equitable and consistently applied?More about indicator

        According to the statements of representatives of political parties, Central Election Commission and Audit Office of Institutions of BiH, the public funds are allocated and distributed to political parties based on the criteria set by the law. Both the ruling and opposition parties receive the funds and there are no obstructions or bias in implementing the eligibility criteria.

        The inconsistencies only occur between different levels of administration due to the differences in the regulations and criteria related to budget allocations to parties, that sometimes lead to the confusion within the institutions in charge of allocating public funds. The separate funds for election campaign are only predicted by the Republic of Srpska Law on financing of political parties from the budget of Republic, cities and municipalities, while other levels predict annual funds, that are also used for election campaigns.

        However, even within Republic of Srpska, small municipalities often decide not to allocate any funds for elections due to budget cuts, while in Federation of BiH due to the lack specific regulation and criteria, there have been situations in which parties are apportioned significantly more, or less, funds from certain administrative levels than planned by the budgets, as well as differences in terms of institutions that allocate funds or situations when municipalities and cantons apply the criteria prescribed for the funds on national level. Most funds come from these subnational levels, meaning that a significant amount of funds are not allocated properly.

        For example, in 2012, in the municipality of Bihac, political parties received only 39.1% of the amount they were due according to the municipal budget because the municipality lacked the necessary funds. In Banovici, parties received only 25% of the amount due, and in Vlasenica, parties took in only 15.3% of the planned amount.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) electoral campaigns allocations are always defined through a clearly defined transparent and equitable calculation mechanism, and 2) the defined eligibility criteria are applied consistently.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) electoral campaign allocations are usually defined through a clearly defined transparent and equitable calculation mechanism but exceptions exist, or 2) the eligibility criteria are usually applied but exceptions exist.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) political campaign allocations are rarely or never defined through a clearly defined transparent and equitable calculation mechanism, or 2) the defined eligibility criteria are rarely applied.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        2. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        3. Interview: Munevera Baftic, manager of Department I of Financial Audit, Audit Office for Institutions of BiH, August 8 2014, Phone
        4. The Review of Budget Allocations for Political Parties for 2010, May 2011, Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina, Available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Pregled-budzetskih-izdvajanja-za-politicke-partije-u-BiH2.pdf
        5. Report about the implementation of the laws in the jurisdiction of the CEC for 2013, published by the CEC. https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/CIK/God-Izvjestaji/2013/Izvjesceza2013godinuSIO_BiH-bos.pdf
      • expand button!
        4
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the entity in charge of public funding make disbursement information publicly available?More about indicator

        The public funding is provided to political parties and independent representatives from all levels of government, and the overall planned amounts are published in the budgets of BiH, entities, cantons and municipalities. The time of publishing, depends on when the budgets are adopted, which varies between different levels and between different institutions on the same level. For example, certain municipalities and cantons still did not have their 2014 budgets adopted in May 2014. Additionally, the form of information published in the budgets varies - some municipalities and cantons publish planned funds for each party, while the others only have overall amounts planned for all parties.

        The detailed disbursement information is published by the Central Election Commission, after the parties submit their financial reports, which is March 30th of the next year, meaning that the information on public funding disbursement for 2010 (most recent General elections), including public funding from all levels, was published in April 2011. The Central Election Commission publishes the disbursement information on its official website.

        The citizens can also file information requests to each institution in charge of providing funds, to access information on amounts planned for political subjects, however the process of acquiring information takes, on average 1 month, even though the deadline prescribed by freedom of information laws is 15 days.

        The parties are not obliged to publish financial reports by the law, and the Law on Free Access to Information does not apply to political parties, since they are not public institutions. Therefore, they do not proactively publish financial information and is up to their arbitrary decision whether they will deliver reports upon request, which they seldom do (e.g. for the purpose of testing the transparency of political parties before General Elections 2010, Transparency International BiH issued information requests to 10 political parties, of which only 2 parties delivered responses; when the same test was repeated with journalists and citizens issuing the same requests, there was no response from any of the parties).

        In conclusion, the institutions publish the information on public finding disbursement, but they are not timely due to legislative limitations and complex bureaucratic procedures.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) complete information on the disbursements is published less than a month after disbursement, and 2) the information is available on the Internet for free or in hard copy at photocopying cost.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) the information published is incomplete or published more than two months after disbursement, or 2) obtaining the information costs more than photocopying.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) disbursement information is published more than four months after disbursement, or 2) no disbursement information is published or released upon request.

        Sources
        1. Information on the funds disbursed to political subjects in 2010 from budgets of all levels of government in Bosnia and Herzegovina, March 2011, Central Election Commission, doc. no. 03-S-1/11. available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2010/Info/Informacija.pdf
        2. Interview: Renata Radic Dragic, Editor, Centre for investigative reporting, July 21 2014, Centre for Investigative Reporting office in Sarajevo.
        3. Interview: Svetlana Cenic, Public finance expert and analyst, July 18 2014, Phone.
        4. The Review of Budget Allocations for Political Parties for 2010, May 2011, Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina, Available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Pregled-budzetskih-izdvajanja-za-politicke-partije-u-BiH2.pdf
        5. Political Party Financing in BiH, 2010, Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina, available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Political-Party-Financing.pdf
    • expand button!
      Indirect Public Funding
      More about category
      • expand button!
        5
        Score
        NO
        In law, use of state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates is prohibited.More about indicator

        The national Law on political party financing bans political parties from receiving funds from administrative bodies on all levels (national, entity, cantonal, district, municipality), public institutions, public companies, associations and organisations who are financed from public funds, legal entities with more than 25% of invested public capital. The Law also bans parties to receive funds from companies who have contracts with governments on all levels. The parties are also banned from taking loans from banks with more than 25% of public ownership. There are exceptions related to the use of premises of public institutions and administrative bodies as offices of political parties. The rules apply to all elections.

        However, neither Election Law nor the Law on Financing of Political Parties have strict bans related to the use of other institutional resources (human resources, vehicles, etc) in favor of a political party/candidate or for the purpose of the campaign.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where there is an explicit ban on the use of state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates. A YES is also earned where there are clearly defined exceptions, which are accessible to all actors equally.

        A MODERATE score is earned where an explicit ban exists but it only applies to one of the two actors, even though both can be elected. A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        A NO score is also earned where the law exists, but allows discretionary exceptions.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Financing of Political Parties of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2012, Article 8. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. Election Law of Bosnia and Herzegovina (2001, with amendments in 2002, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013 and 2014). All amendments available at: hhttp://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/English/Laws/ElectionLawof_BiH-eng.pdf
      • expand button!
        6
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent are no state resources used in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates' electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        There is a practice of parties in power using their positions in governmental bodies to transfer funds to organisations (sports associations, NGOs, veteran associations, etc.) or media in order to enable additional promotion during the election campaign. This is usually used by parties that hold power on different levels and use their position in certain institutions or public companies to extract additional funds for the campaign.

        Additionally, during the last national elections, there were several cases of campaigns carried out and funded by public institutions, including the Government of Republic of Srpska and the Ministry of Energy of the Federation of BiH, that were used for direct promotion of ruling political parties and their achievements in the previous mandate. Moreover, the parties in power on different levels and institutions used institutional resources, such as staff, cars, travel expenses, representational expenses, premises, etc. for the purposes of attending and organising campaign events and rallies. Also, the Audit Office of Institutions of BiH has warned that the parliamentary clubs of political parties in the national parliament do not account for their expenses, and fail to submit reports to the Joint Administrative Committee; the same institution has also warned that during the election years there is a significant increase in the public expenditure, that might suggest that the funds are being used for campaign purposes. Also, the Government of RS has a practice of awarding donations to the public and private media, without transparent criteria, especially in the preelection period, which can be interpreted as the attempt of ruling party to ensure favourable treatment before the elections.

        The use of premises of public institutions as the offices of political parties has been noted by the Audit Service of Central Election Commission in the audit reports for political parties, which lead to the amendments to the Law on Political Parties that regulated this practice as an exception to the ban on receiving donations from public institutions, and legalised the practice.

        This practice was confirmed by both interviewed representatives of political parties, and has also been noted by CSO representatives and the media during the campaign for the last national elections.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where there is no evidence of authorities using state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates. A 100 is also earned where there are clearly defined exceptions and are equally accessible to all actors.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) documented evidence indicates occasional use of state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates, or 2) clearly defined exceptions are not equally accessible to all actors.

        A 0 score is earned where documented evidence indicates regular use of state resources in favor of or against certain political parties and individual candidates.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        2. Interview: Nermina Zaimovic Uzunovic, member of Social Democratic Party of BiH and the MP in the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, July 26 2014, e-mail.
        3. Interview: Adis Arapovic, Program Manager, Centre for Civic Initiatives, July 30 2014, e-mail
        4. Interview: Munevera Baftic, Manager of Department I of Financial Audit, Audit Office for Institutions of BiH, August 8 2014, Phone
        5. Through Abuse of Public Funds to Election Points, by Intermezzo, September 1 2010, available at: http://intermezzo.ba/2010/09/zloupotrebom-javnih-sredstava-do-izbornih-poena/
        6. Transparency International Filed a Criminal Complaint Against Minister Heco, by Radio Sarajevo, September 23 2010, available at: http://radiosarajevo.ba/novost/33939/transpareny-international-podnio-krivicnu-prijavu-protiv-ministra-hece
        7. Government millions for private media in RS, by Centre for Investigatove Reporting, February 22 2012, available at: http://www.cin.ba/vladini-milioni-za-privatne-medije-u-rs-u/
        8. The Report on Financial Audit of the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH for 2010, Audit Office for Institutions of BiH, June 2011, available at: http://www.revizija.gov.ba/revizioniizvjestaji/izvj2010/?id=2267
      • expand button!
        7
        Score
        YES
        In law, political parties and individual candidates have free or subsidized access to equitable air time for electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        The Election Law prescribes the obligation of public service media to enable all political subjects free air time for their direct address during 30 days of election campaign. All parties and candidates certified for participation in elections are eligible for free airtime in public media, and there are no differences in the legislation between local and general elections. When it comes to private media, Section 16 of the Law only mandates the obligation of providing equal opportunities and conditions for paid advertising, and leaves them a possibility to also provide free air time, if they choose so, in which case they must provide equal access for all parties and candidates.

        The Central Election Commissions determines the amount of air time, time slots, and geographic areas covered. The Rulebook on Media Presentation of Political Subjects in the Period from Announcement of Elections to the Day of Elections states that the media determine the length of direct addresses based on previous practice and the number of candidates, with the obligation to give the same amount of time to all candidates. The schedule of addresses is determined by lottery and published not more than 7 days before the start of the election campaign.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) free or subsidized access to air time for electoral campaigns is granted in a transparent, equitable way, and 2) there are clearly defined eligibility criteria.

        A MODERATE score is earned where free or subsidized access to air time for electoral campaigns is granted in a transparent, equitable way, but eligibility criteria are not clearly defined.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. Election Law of Bosnia and Herzegovina (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014). Article 16, Available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/English/Laws/ElectionLawof_BiH-eng.pdf
        2. The Rulebook on Media Presentation of Political Subjects in the Period from Announcement of Elections to the Day of Elections (2010), available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/Opci-Izbori-2010/Mediji/Pravilnikomedijskom_predstavljanju-BOS.pdf
      • expand button!
        8
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent is free or subsidized access to air time provided in a transparent, equitable way to political parties and individual candidates for electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        The free access to the media is only provided by public broadcasting service in the form of direct address of candidates, since private media are not obliged to give free time by law. Private media only publish election chronicles with statements and presentations of political parties and candidates and coverage of campaign events and rallies.

        According to the interviewed political party representatives, the time for direct address of candidates is evenly distributed and all candidates have equal opportunities. However, since each of the public broadcasting services determine the schedule and length of direct addresses individually by the method of lottery, the party representatives expressed in the interviews that they are not clear on the process of determining the schedule of addresses.

        Moreover, Communications Regulatory Agency determined three cases of violations of the rules on media presentation of candidates related to the direct access, i.e. free air time for candidates, and 5 other cases of violations of media rules set by Election Law.

        It must also be mentioned that the media monitoring reports for the election campaign for the last general election in 2010 warn about the worrying practice of media bias, the use of political influences of parties in power and their positions in the institutions for media promotion of their parties, the direct connection of certain media outlets with political parties and the inequality in presenting all candidates.

        In conclusion, the criteria for allocation of free air time are consistently applied, but the general rules related to presentation of candidates during the election campaign can be and sometimes are circumvented.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) free or subsidized access to media advertising is always provided in a transparent and equitable way, and 2) the defined eligibility criteria are applied consistently.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) free or subsidized access to media advertising is usually provided in a transparent and equitable way, but exceptions exist, or 2) the eligibility criteria are not always applied.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) there's rarely free or subsidized access to air time for political campaign, and 2) access exists but is not provided in a transparent, equitable way.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        2. Interview: Nermina Zaimovic Uzunovic, member of Social Democratic Party of BiH and the MP in the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, July 26 2014, e-mail.
        3. The Report on Rules Violations for 2010, Communications Regulatory Agency, April 2014, available at: http://rak.ba/bos/index.php?uid=1272548169
        4. R. Udovicic, D. Marko, L. Turcilo and T. Ljubic (2010) Elections 2010 in BiH: The Media Coverage of Election Campaign, Media Plan, December 2010, available at: http://www.mediaplan.ba/docs/Izbori2010BA.pdf
  • expand button!

    Contribution and Expenditure Restrictions

    More about category
    composite
    77
    • expand button!
      General Rules on Electoral Campaign Contributions
      More about category
      • expand button!
        9
        Score
        NO
        In law, cash contributions are banned.More about indicator

        The Law on Financing Political Parties states that the parties are obliged to make evidence and records of all contributions, including donations and membership fees, and to deposit them to the transactional account within 10 days of receiving the contribution. However, the Law does not clearly state that the cash contributions are banned. According to article 18 of the same law, independent candidates are subject to the same restrictions as parties (or lack thereof).

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where cash contributions are banned and all financial contributions must be made via the banking system.

        A MODERATE score is earned where cash contributions are allowed up to a maximum limit, regardless of the limit.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Law on Financing Political Parties of BiH (2012). Article 5, Paragraph 4, Article 18, Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf

      • expand button!
        10
        Score
        YES
        In law, there is a ban on anonymous contributions.More about indicator

        Article 8 of the Law on Political Party Financing of BiH prohibits parties from receiving anonymous donations.

        By article 18 of the same law, the same rules which apply for financing political parties, including anonymos donations, also apply for independent candidates (Article 18 of The Law on Political Party Financing of BiH)

        Note, however, that according to the Rule Book on Annual Financial Reports of Political Parties and the Rule Book on Pre-election and Post-election Financial Reports, the political parties are to report only contributions that exceed 100 KM (cca 70 USD). The same is prescribed by the Election Law of BiH. This leads to a conclusion that parties and candidates can accept anonymous donations if they do not exceed the limit of 100 KM (70 USD). The law basically gives the oportunity for parties to accept donations in cash, and then put them on their party accounts within 10 days (Article 5.4), which practically enables them to receive anonymous donations (even though later Article 6 suggests that donations are paid through party transaction accounts). Additionally, the law itself does not provide clear obligation of having only one bank account that can be reviewed by the auditors, so it leaves additional space for accepting anonymous donations or not reporting the recieved donations from known sources.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where the law stipulates that anonymous contributions are banned.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the ban exists, but it applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates). A MODERATE score is also earned where small anonymous donations are allowed up to a maximum threshold equal to or less than the equivalent to US$300.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Political Party Financing of BiH (2012), Articles 8, 5, 6, 18, Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. Election Law of BiH (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014), Article 15. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/English/Laws/BIHElectionlaw.pdf
        3. Rule Book on Pre-Election and Post-Election Financial Reports of Political Parties (2013), Article 5, Available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikoPPIPS-bos.PDF
        4. Rule Book on Annual Financial Reports of Political Parties (2013), Article 5, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikOGodisFinIz-bos.PDF
      • expand button!
        11
        Score
        YES
        In law, in-kind donations to political parties and individual candidates must be reported.More about indicator

        The parties and candidates are obliged to report all in-kind donations in their annual and pre-election and post-election financial reports to the Central Election Commission. This is prescribed by Election Law for parties and candidates and rule books on financial reports, as well as Law on Political Party Financing for political parties. The parties are to report the name of the contributor, type of goods or services received, the date, and the value of the contribution.

        The Law on Political Party Financing of BiH also states that "Legal entities or natural persons that provide service or sell a product to a political party must issue an invoice to the party, which will indicate market value of donated product or provided service, and which will be issued to the name of political party indicating that it is not subject to the payment".

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where all in-kind donations must be reported to the oversight authority.

        A MODERATE score is also earned if the requirement to report such information exists, but applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Political Party Financing of BiH (2012), Article 5, Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. Election Law of BiH (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014), Article 15. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/English/Laws/BIHElectionlaw.pdf
        3. Rule Book on Pre-Election and Post-Election Financial Reports of Political Subjects (2013), Article 5, Available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikoPPIPS-bos.PDF
        4. Rule Book onAnnual Financial Reports of Political Parties (2013), Article 5, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikOGodisFinIz-bos.PDF
      • expand button!
        12
        Score
        YES
        In law, loans to political parties and individual candidates must be reported.More about indicator

        According to the rulebooks for financial reports of political parties and candidates, they are obliged to report all financial liabilities, including the loans to the Central Election Commission.The reports include the source of the loan, the amount and date of the loan, the interest rate, the repayment deadline, and the amount of the liability on the date of submitting the report.

        According to the Law on Political Party Financing, however, the parties are not allowed to receive loans from banks that have more than 25% of invested state capital.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where all loans must be reported to the oversight authority.

        A MODERATE score is earned where loans must be reported, but the requirement applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. Rule Book on Pre-Election and Post-Election Financial Reports of Political Subjects (2013), Article 5, Available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikoPPIPS-bos.PDF
        2. Rule Book onAnnual Financial Reports of Political Parties (2013), Article 5, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikOGodisFinIz-bos.PDF
        3. Templates for the financial reports of political subjects (2103), Central Election Commission. Available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/ObrasciRev-bos.PDF
        4. The Law on Political Party Financing of BiH (2012), Article 9, available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
    • expand button!
      Limits on Contributions and Expenditures during Electoral Campaign Periods
      More about category
      • expand button!
        13
        Score
        YES
        In law, contributions from individuals are limited to a maximum amount.More about indicator

        The Law on Political Party Financing prescribes that the total amount of contributions made by an individual to a political party must not exceed the amount of 10.000,00 KM (cca 6900 USD). Individuals may give contributions to political parties once or several times in a calendar year., but the overall amount must not exceed the limit. The total amount paid to the political party by a member of the political party during one year must not exceed the amount of 15.000,00 KM (cca 10,345 USD), membership fees included.

        According the article 18 of the The Law on Political Party Financing, the same rules and limits are applying to the donations given to independent candidates. By this logic, contributions to candidates are also limited.

        Note, however, there is no supervision of candidates' accounts, therefore it is impossible to ensure that the rules are respected in practice.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) individuals may not contribute more than a maximum amount established by the law.

        A MODERATE score is earned where a maximum amount exists, but it applies only to contributions for one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates). A MODERATE score is also earned where individuals are forbidden from making any contribution.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Law on Political Party Financing of BiH (2012), Article 6 and 18, available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf

      • expand button!
        14
        Score
        YES
        In law, contributions from corporations are limited to a maximum amount.More about indicator

        The Law on Political Party Financing prescribes that the total amount of contributions made by legal entities to a political party must not exceed the amount of 50.000,00 KM (cca 34,483 USD). The contributions to political parties can be given once or several times in a calendar year, but the overall amount must not exceed the limit. The same law also apply to donations given to independent candidates.

        Note, however, there is no supervision of candidates' accounts, therefore it is impossible to ensure that the rules are respected in practice.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) corporations may not contribute more than a maximum amount established by the law.

        A MODERATE score is earned where a maximum amount or ban exists, but it applies only to contributions for one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates). A MODERATE score is also earned where corporations are forbidden from making any contribution.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Law on Political Party Financing (2012), Article 6, 18, available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf

      • expand button!
        15
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, contributions from foreign sources are banned.More about indicator

        The Law on Political Party Financing restricts parties from receiving funds from "other states, foreign parties and foreign legal entities." However, the rule does not refer to financing educational programs, aimed at developing and promoting democratic goals. The same rules set by the Law on Political Party Financing apply for individual candidates, however it must be taken into consideration that independent candidates report only in election years and that, as natural persons they can receive funds from other countries through their personal contracts.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where it is forbidden for political parties and individual candidates to receive contributions (financial or in-kind) from foreign sources.

        A MODERATE score is earned where: 1) the ban exists but it applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates), or 2) contributions from foreign sources are allowed to a maximum amount.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Law on Political Party Financing (2012), Article 8, Paragraphs 1 and 3, article 18, available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf

      • expand button!
        16
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, contributions from third-party actors (unions, foundations, think tanks, political action committees, etc.) are limited to a maximum amount or banned.More about indicator

        The Law on Political Party Financing prescribes that the it is prohibited for natural or legal persons to give contributions to political parties through third persons (by a proxy). The law prohibits contributions from humanitarian organisations and religious communities. The law also prohibits contributions from unions, associations and non-profit organisations if they are financed by public funds. However, there is no general ban on contributions from third-parties.

        The laws on associations and foundations of BiH and entities, that include non-profits, associations, foundations, and foundations, but does not mention unions specifically, prohibits these actors to engage in election campaigns and to collect funds for political parties or candidates. However, it is still not clear whether this is only limited to collecting funds, or also giving contributions. It is also important to mention that the BiH legal system does not recognize political action committees.

        When it comes to the maximum amount of donations, there are general limits on contributions from individuals, legal entities, or party members, without exceptions for the third-parties.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) third-party actors may not contribute more than a maximum amount established by the law, or 2) are forbidden from making any contribution.

        A MODERATE score is earned where: 1) the maximum amount or ban exists only for the majority of third-party actors, but not all, or 2) the maximum amount or ban exists, but applies only to contributions for either political parties or individual candidates.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012), Article 8, available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. The Law on Associations and Foundations of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2001, 2003, 2008, 2011, available at: http://mpu.ks.gov.ba/sites/mpu.ks.gov.ba/files/ZakonUdruzenjaFondacije32-01.pdf http://www.fmks.gov.ba/kultura/legislativa/bih/10.pdf
      • expand button!
        17
        Score
        YES
        In law, election campaign spending by political parties and individual candidates is limited to a maximum amount.More about indicator

        The campaign spending limits for parties and candidates exist, and they are set based on the number of voters in each constituency for which the party has candidates. The Central Election Commission of BiH l announce the number of voters for each constituency within seven days of the day of completion of the Central Voters Register. The maximum amount allowed to be spent for financing the election campaign represents a result of the multiplication of the number of voters in all constituencies by:

        1. 0.30 KM (0.20 USD) for the elections of Head of Municipality/City Mayor and members of the Municipal Council/Assembly
        2. 0.20 KM (0.14 USD) for the elections of members of Cantonal Assemblies
        3. 0.30 KM (0.20 USD) for the elections of members of the RS National Assembly and the House of Representatives of the Federation Parliament 4.0.30 KM (0.20 USD) for the elections of members of the Parliamentary Assembly of BIH
        4. 0.30 KM (0.20 USD) for the elections of members of the Presidency of BiH
        5. 0.30 KM (0.20 USD) for the elections of President and Vice President of the Republika Srpska.

        If the elections are repeated in a constituency, or in the Polling Station, the costs of the election campaign per voter can increase by up to 30% of the costs of the elections annulled in the electoral unit or the polling. 6. 0.30 KM ....................................... for the elections of President and Vice President of the Republika Srpska. If the elections are repeated in a constituency, or in the Polling Station, the costs of the election campaign per voter can increase by up to 30% of the costs of the elections annulled in the electoral unit or the polling.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where it is forbidden for political parties and individual candidates to spend more than a certain amount in a political campaign.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the maximum amount exists, but it applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        Election Law of BiH (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014), Article 15.10. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf

      • expand button!
        18
        Score
        --
        Open Question: Do the national laws regulating political finance also apply to sub-national units? If not, to what extent do sub-national units have laws regulating political finance?More about indicator

        The national laws, the Law on Political Party Financing and Election Law, that stipulate the provisions on political party funding and campaign funding (i.e. the sources of funding, reporting, monitoring body, sanctions, etc.) are applied on all levels of government and both General and Local elections. Only the provisions related to public funding for political parties are regulated separately for each level.

        The budget allocations are regulated by national Political Party Financing Law for the national level, the Law on Financing of Political Parties from the Budget of Republic and Municipalities of Republic of Srpska, and the Law on Financing of Political Parties of Brcko District. When it comes to Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and its cantons and municipalities, the laws on execution of the budget are applied on these levels, even though in some municipalities and cantons the separate decisions are made to apply the rules from the national level when it comes to criteria on distribution of public funds to political parties.

        The differences in the regulations and criteria related to budget allocations to parties, lead to inconsistencies in application of these rules on different levels, and even confusion within the institutions in charge for allocating public funds. For example, there have been instances when lower levels of government apply the national law, or there are different names and categories for allocations for political parties amongst different institutions, and even the differences in institutions in charge of allocation of funds - on some levels it will be the ministry of finance, on others it will be the government, and in some instances it will be directly paid from the budget, while in other cases the funds are allocated through a specific institution or a service. Additionally, due to a lack of legislation on FBiH level, there have been situations in which parties are apportioned significantly more, or less, funds from certain administrative levels than planned by the budgets. There are no inconsistencies between national and sub-national levels for other regulations referring to political party finance, since they are regulated by national level legislation.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please describe the applicability of national political finance regulations at the sub-national level, being sure to answer: 1) whether national laws are applicable to sub-national campaigns; 2) if not, to what extent do sub-national units have similar laws regulating political finance; and 3) whether there are any reports of problems arising from gaps in this framework.

        Sources
        1. The Review of Budget Allocations for Political Parties for 2010, May 2011, Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina, Available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Pregled-budzetskih-izdvajanja-za-politicke-partije-u-BiH2.pdf
        2. Interview: Svetlana Cenic, Public finance expert and analyst, July 18 2014, Phone.
        3. The Law on Political Party Financing, of BiH (2012), available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        4. The Law on financing of political parties from the budget of Republic, cities and municipalities of Republika Srpska, 2008, Articles 2, 3 and 5. Available at: http://www.podaci.net/gBiH/propis/Zakono_finansiranju/Z-fpsbrg03v0865.html
        5. Law on Financing of Political Parties of Brcko District BiH, 2004, 2007 and 2007, available at: a). http://www.skupstinabd.ba/zakoni/101/b/Zakon%20o%20financ.politickih%20stranaka%20u%20Brcko%20DC-Sl.glasnik%20Brcko%20DC,br.29-04.pdf b). http://www.skupstinabd.ba/zakoni/149/Zakon%20o%20izmj.%20Zakona%20o%20fin.pol.stranaka-%20B.pdf
        6. Information on Planned and Distributed Budget Allocations in 2013 from the Budgets of Entitites, Brcko District and Bosnia and Herzegovina, April 2014, Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2013/Prilog12.pdf
      • expand button!
        19
        Score
        --
        Open Question: What are the predominant sources of funding for electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        According to the Central Election Commission evidence and data, as well as statements from representatives of political parties, the dominant source of campaign funding is the public funds apportioned from the budget of different levels of government - the national budget, entity, cantonal and municipal budgets. According to the CEC data on post-election financial reports for General elections 2014, the budget allocations amounted 67,54% in the parties' overall income, 20% were the contributions from individuals, 5,07% contributions from legal entities, 4,17% membership fees, and 2,33% income from parties' property. In additional, in the overall financing of political parties, the percent of their income is 66,4%, while 33,6% are parties' liabilities (loans, leasing, obligations to vendors, employees', etc.).

        The independent candidates receive small budget allocations in Republic of Srpska, where the allocations for election campaigns is predicted, but most of their financing is self-finance or contributions that cannot be tracked since they are made on a personal basis and the CEC does not have the authority to review their personal bank accounts, while most of independent candidates' financial reports are submitted blank.

        When it comes to candidates running as members of political parties, their campaigns are mostly financed by political parties, but according to a representative of PDP, they also have an option to self-finance their own campaign, and this part of the campaign is not reported by the party. Moreover, party representatives that hold positions in institutions at different levels give a portion of their income as a contribution to the party, which is a standard practice in all significant political parties.

        When it comes to other methods of generating funds by political parties, some of the parties have property generated income, such as Social Democratic Party that inherited property from the formerly Communist Party, and this is the second-largest source of income from this party. The parties are also allowed to generate income from companies in their ownership (the companies have limited scope of allowed activities by law), but as seen from aforementioned CEC data, this does not present a significant source of income.

        However, other sources of campaign funding that are not reported through the financial reports must also be considered. These range from indirect budget allocations through third-parties to in-kind donations for campaign rallies and promotional material. This is usually used by parties that hold power on different levels and use their position in certain institutions or public companies to extract additional funds for the campaign, or condition the private companies who are financed by institutions that these parties govern or are owned by people who are connected to these parties, to give in-kind contributions such as, tents, food and drinks for campaign rallies or printing material, etc. This practice was confirmed by both interviewed representatives of political parties, and has also been noted by CSO representatives and the media during the campaign for the last national elections. Unfortunately, the percentage of these funds is impossible to account for, since they remain unreported.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please describe the important sources of funding for electoral campaigns, being sure to answer: 1) where does the preponderance of funding come from - public, individual, corporate, or other; 2) to what extent do individual candidates self-finance; and 3) do political parties have other methods of generating campaign funds, such as owning their own businesses or trusts.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        2. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        3. Interview: Nermina Zaimovic Uzunovic, member of Social Democratic Party of BiH and the MP in the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, July 26 2014, e-mail.
        4. Information on the Post-Election Financial Reports of Political Parties and Independent Candidates - General Elections 2010 (December 21 2010), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents//documents/revizija/2010/InfoRev23122010.pdf
        5. Post-election financial reports for 2010 (2011), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=211&Lang=3&Tag=19.
        6. Transparency International Filed a Criminal Complaint Against Minister Heco, by Radio Sarajevo, September 23 2010, available at: http://radiosarajevo.ba/novost/33939/transpareny-international-podnio-krivicnu-prijavu-protiv-ministra-hece
      • expand button!
        20
        Score
        --
        Open Question: Have there been documented instances of violations of contribution or expenditure limits or any of the laws mentioned above (Section 2)?More about indicator

        The Central Election Commission, in its annual audit reports of financial reports of political parties every year determines numerous violations of political finance regulations, including those related to contribution and expenditure limits, as well as receiving contributions that are not permitted by the law.

        In their annual report for 2013, CEC stated that in 2013 the following violations were determined: - receiving income from sources not allowed by the Law; - not reporting all expenditures and income; - exceeding the limits on donations - 4 parties exceeded the limits on campaign expenditure for early municipal elections.

        In 2013 alone, CEC announced sanctions for 46 political parties, with total amount of fines of 146.000 KM ( 97.000 USD). Individual fines per party are between 500 KM (330 USD) and 25.000 KM (16.600 USD).

        When it comes to the violations related to the last national elections in 2010, the CEC announced sanctions for 16 political parties, and the same types of violations are registered, as in the aforementioned report. They involve cases of parties misusing their funds for private gain (the party HKDU), circumventing the rules on reporting in-kind donations in cases of fees to performers at their campaign events (in case of SNSD and SDA), failure to report all sources of income and all expenditure, etc. A detailed list of all the parties sanctioned, and a summary of the violations for which they received sanctions, can be found in sources 2 and 3.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please list and describe all documented instances of: 1) violation of contribution limits, 2) violation of expenditure limits, and 3) financial contributions that circumvent the regulatory framework. The objective of this question is to learn more about the local context, so please explain the cases in as much detail as relevant.

        Sources
        1. Political Parties' Frauds, by Almir Terzic, January 28 2013, Zasto Ne, available at: http://zastone.ba/almir-terzic-malverzacije-politickih-stranaka-u-bih/
        2. Report on Implementation of Laws Under the Authority of Central Election Commission for 2013, March 2014 2014, Central Election Commission, available at: http://zastone.ba/almir-terzic-malverzacije-politickih-stranaka-u-bih/
        3. Report on Implementation of Laws Under the Authority of Central Election Commission for 2012, March 2013, Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/CIK/God-Izvjestaji/2012/Izvjestajoprovodenju-2012-bos.pdf
        4. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        5. SNSD Exceeded the Campaign Limit Again, by CIN, March 6 2013, Centre for Investigative Reporting, available at: http://www.cin.ba/snsd-ponovo-prekoracio-limit-za-kampanju/
  • expand button!

    Reporting and Public Disclosure

    More about category
    composite
    46
    • expand button!
      Reporting Requirements to the Oversight Entity
      More about category
      • expand button!
        21
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political parties and individual candidates report itemized contributions and expenditures both during and outside electoral campaign periods.More about indicator

        Political parties must submit annual financial reports to Central Election Commission, as well as itemized pre-election and post-election financial reports. The annual reports must be submitted no later than March 31, for the previous year. The pre-election reports are submitted for the period prior to the date of submission of the application for certification to participate in the elections. The post-election reports covers the period beginning on the day of submission of the application to participate in the elections until the certification of the election results.

        In annual reports, the parties must submit itemized information on: - List of all transactions on the business account of the political party, - Contributions from individual persons in excess of KM 100 (70 USD). as well as contributions of legal entities in excess of KM 100 (70 USD), - Income of the political party generated by property - Profit of legal entities owned by the political party, - in-kind donations and bills that the political party was not obliged to pay, - Funds apportioned from the budget, - Income from publishing, sales of promotional materials and organisation of campaigning events, -Expenditures of the political party, -Loans, credits and debts.

        In addition to this, the pre-election and post-election reports include information on itemized campaign expenditure: - costs for printing of posters, - costs for distribution of posters, - printing costs for pre-election announcements, statements etc. in the mass media, - organisational and operational costs for organising rallies, - costs for printing, reproducing and delivering pre-election materials directly to voters, - other advertising costs.

        The financial information is reported through standardised templates prescribed by the Central Election Commission.

        The independent candidates submit only pre-election and post-election reports that are submtted both by political parties and independent candidates, and annual reports rules refer only to political parties.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where political parties and individual candidates are required to report itemized contributions and expenditures to the oversight authority, both during and outside electoral campaign periods.

        A MODERATE score is earned where: 1) the requirement applies for itemized contributions, but not for itemized expenditures, or 2) it applies only during the electoral campaign but not outside it. A MODERATE score is also earned where the requirement exists, but it only applies to one actor (whether political parties and individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Rule Book on Annual Financial Reports of Political Parties (2013), available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikOGodisFinIz-bos.PDF
        2. The Rule Book on Pre-Election and Post-Election Reports of Political Subjects (2013), available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikoPPIPS-bos.PDF
        3. The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012), Article 12, available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
      • expand button!
        22
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political parties and individual candidates are required to report their financial information on a monthly basis during the electoral campaign.More about indicator

        The parties and candidates must submit pre-election and post-election financial reports. As part of the application for participating in elections, candidates and parties file pre-election financial reports, which cover the period from the beginning of the year up until the submission of the application.

        The post-election reports cover the period beginning on the day of submission of the application to participate in the elections until the certification of the election results. This means that, even though the official campaign period lasts only 30 days, the post-election financial report covers a period of five months (including the 30 day campaign). The post-election reports must be submitted not later than 30 days after the Central Election Commission has published the official election results.

        In sum, the legal reporting requirements, which apply to both parties and candidates, mandate 2 reports for a period of time that cannot be less than five months, and depending on the date of the election, may be quite a bit more than five months.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where political parties and individual candidates must report monthly their financial information to the oversight authority during the electoral campaign.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the requirement exists on a quarterly basis. A MODERATE score is also earned where the requirement only applies to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Rule Book on Pre-Election and Post-Election Reports of Political Subjects (2013), available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikoPPIPS-bos.PDF

      • expand button!
        23
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political parties and individual candidates are required to report their financial information on a quarterly basis outside of electoral campaign periods.More about indicator

        The individual candidates are only obliged to submit pre-election and post-election financial reports, while the obligation to submit annual reports applies only to political parties. There is no obligation to submit quarterly reports, instead the reports are submitted by political parties on an annual basis, by March 31 for the previous calendar year.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where political parties and individual candidates must report quarterly their financial information to the oversight authority outside of electoral campaign periods.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the requirement exists on a yearly basis. A MODERATE score is also earned where the requirement only applies to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012), Article 12, available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. The Rule Book on Annual Financial Reports of Political Parties (2013), available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikOGodisFinIz-bos.PDF
      • expand button!
        24
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent do political parties and individual candidates report itemized financial information monthly?More about indicator

        Even though the parties and candidates are obliged to submit itemized financial reports to the Central Election Commission, they are not submitted on a monthly basis, since the legal framework does not mandate monthly reporting. The parties and candidates submit pre-election and post-election financial reports. The pre-election reports are submitted for the period prior to the date of submission of the application for certification to participate in the elections. The post-election reports cover the period beginning on the day of submission of the application to participate in the elections until the certification of the election results. This period, as previously explained, can amount to no less than five months.

        The parties generally respect the obligation to submit the reports, e.g. 87% of the parties delivered their post-election financial reports for 2010, while only 61,5% of independent candidates submitted their reports. Additionally, most of the reports of independent candidates were blank, therefore it cannot be said that the independent candidates deliver itemized reports at all.

        According to the political party representatives, there is even no practice to inform the management of the party, or the party bodies, on the financial issues on a monthly basis.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) political parties and individual candidates report on their financial information monthly, and 2) the reports include both itemized contributions and itemized expenditures.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) the reports are occasionally general rather than itemized or don't contain all accounts, or 2) the reporting frequency is quarterly.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) political parties and individual candidates rarely or never file reports, 2) the reports are filed but are rarely or never itemized or refer only to either contributions or expenditures, or 3) the reporting frequency is less than quarterly.

        Sources
        1. Post-Election Financial Reports of Political subjects, 2010, Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=211&Lang=3&Tag=19.
        2. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        3. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        4. Interview: Nermina Zaimovic Uzunovic, member of Social Democratic Party of BiH and the MP in the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, July 26 2014, e-mail.
      • expand button!
        25
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent do financial reports by political parties and individual candidates include all types of contributions?More about indicator

        Political parties' financial reports' structure is prescribed by Central Election Commission, and all parties used standardised templates that contain itemised information on all types of contributions, in kind donations, budget allocations, income from property and companies owned by parties, and all other sources including loans and liabilities, including the names of the sources, their ID numbers (both for individuals and legal entities) and dates of contributions, as well as the individual amounts of these contributions and income.

        However, the reports on audit of financial reports of political parties, point out the practice of political parties failing to report all contributions, especially in-kind donations (e.g. failure to report the free use of offices as in-kind donations, or failure to report services of famous singers performing at their campaign rallies as in-kind donations). For example, according the Report on Audit of Annual Financial Reports for 2010 and Pre-Election and Post-Election Financial Reports for the General Elections 2010 of the Alliance of Independent Social Democrats, SNSD in their reports didn't include costs for popular singer Svetlana Ceca Raznatovic, although she performed on the two SNSD campaign events, in Banja Luka and Bijeljina. As there is no records of payment then it's considered as her contribution in kind to the SNSD, which according the law also need to be reported, but SNSD didn't report this contribution. Additionally, according to political parties' representatives, the parties do not have a practice of reporting contributions (financial and in-kind) to individual candidates, who often finance parts of their campaigns.

        When it comes to independent candidates, who by law submit only pre-election and post-election reports, the practice and their available financial reports, show that most of the candidates do not report their contributions (apart from the budget allocations) and mostly submit empty financial reports.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) reports include an itemized list of all contributions indicating their type (in-kind, cash where allowed, etc.) and amount (estimated value for in-kind contributions), and 2) contain donors' names and addresses (or other personal identifier).

        A 50 score is earned where only one of the two conditions listed in the 100 criteria is met.

        A 0 score is earned where neither condition is met.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Nermina Zaimovic Uzunovic, member of Social Democratic Party of BiH and the MP in the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, July 26 2014, e-mail.
        2. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        3. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        4. Post-election Financial Reports of Political Subjects for General Elections 2010 (2011), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=211&Lang=3&Tag=19
        5. The Report on Audit of Annual Financial Report for 2010 and Pre-Election and Post-Election Financial Reports for General Elections 2010 of Alliance of Independent Social Democrats Milorad Dodik (2012), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2010/Izvjestaj_Revizija/I515-bos.pdf
        6. The Report on Audit of Annual Financial Report for 2010 and Pre-Election and Post-Election Financial Reports for General Elections 2010 of Party of Democratic Action (2012), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2010/Izvjestaj_Revizija/I090-bos.pdf
    • expand button!
      Availability of Electoral Campaigns' Financial Information to the Public
      More about category
      • expand button!
        26
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, financial information from political parties and individual candidates must be available to the public.More about indicator

        The Law on Political Party Financing stipulates that the Central Election Commission must make all reports accessible to the public through its web page and take appropriate measures in order to ensure access to reports’ information for all citizens. However, the rule books on annual and pre-election and post-election financial reports prescribe the obligation for CEC to only publish extracts from the parties' and candidates' financial reports and there is no obligation to publish full financial reports. The Rule Book on Pre-Election and Post-Election Reports only stipulates the obligation for CEC to publish limits for campaign expenditures and to publish report sheets 4.2. that contain overall amounts for campaign expenditure and overall mounts for categories such as printing of posters, campaign rallies, advertising in mass media, but not the full reports. There are no stipulations in these laws and by-laws regarding the deadlines for publishing the reports.

        The citizens can submit information requests to the CEC and acquire all information that do not contain personal data, and by Law on Free Access to Informationthe CEC is obliged to respond to the request within 15 days. Until the changes in the rule books on financial reports in 2013, the reports on individual sources of income contained information protected by the Law on Protection of Personal Data, and were not published. After the amendments that included changes in the financial reports' templates, this type of information can be published, but other parts of the reports (such as individual expenses and liabilities) are not published.

        There is no obligation for political parties to publish their reports, neither by the legislation on political finance, nor by laws on free access to information.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where in law financial information of political parties and individual candidates must be made available to the public, whether online or digitally within two days of request.

        A MODERATE score is earned where financial information must be made available to the public, but no requirement exists regarding cost, format or number of days within which it must be made available.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012), Article 13, paragraph 5, available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. The Rule Book on Pre-Election and Post-Election Reports of Political Subjects (2013), available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/2013/Revizija/PP/PravilnikoPPIPS-bos.PDF
        3. The Law on Free Access to Information of Bosnia and Herzegovina (2000, 2006, 2009, 2013), available at: http://www.mpr.gov.ba/pristup_info/default.aspx?id=2574&langTag=bs-BA
      • expand button!
        27
        Score
        25
        In practice, to what extent can citizens easily access the financial information of all political parties and individual candidates?More about indicator

        The Central Election Commission publishes extracts of financial reports of political parties and there is no obligation to publish full financial reports. The published extracts include the overall amounts each party branch for: paid membership fees, donations from individual persons and members, donations from legal entities, income generated by party’s property, income generated by companies owned by the party, income from the gifts or services that the party did not have to pay for, appropriations from the budget, and finally the total income of the party. After the amendments of the rulebooks on financial reports, the extracts also contain the sheets with identities of individual sources of contributions. The pre-election and post-election reports published on the CEC also include the overall amounts for costs for printing of posters, costs for distribution of posters, printing costs for pre-election announcements, statements etc. in the mass media, organisational and operational costs for organising rallies, costs for printing, reproducing and delivering pre-election materials directly to voters, other advertising costs. However, none of the published reports contain the list of itemized expenditures.

        The complete reports must be sought through the information requests, and in the case when this involves heavy documentation, the access is granted in the premises of CEC where they cannot be copied, or the citizens must pay for each additional page when the reports exceed 20 pages. For the purposes of other research, an information request was sent by the researcher to the CEC asking for the information of one a party's expenses (SDP), since they are not published on the website. The response was delivered within 15 days, asking for the transfer of funds necessary for the copies, as prescribed by the Law on Free Access to Information. It took additional time for the funds to be transferred, and then for the documentation to be delivered, so the overall process lasted more than a month. Although the documents contained information on expenses for all the branches of the party, they did not present the itemized individual expenses with the identities of vendors or service providers. The costs of acquiring the information were approximately 40 USD.

        The political parties do not publish their financial reports on their website, and the Law on Free Access to Information does not apply to political parties. The "transparency test" that was done by TI BiH, on the sample of 10 citizens and 5 journalists before the General Elections 2010, who send their requests asking for financial reports and plans of campaign expenditure of political parties for the election campaign, showed no response from any of the 4 parties chosen for the research, to any of the citizens or journalists.

        The reports are not in the machine readable format and this is not the practice of any BiH institutions.

        In conclusion, citizens can easily access very limited, general information on political parties' finance, while there are many obstacles for acquiring detailed information.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) all relevant financial information is freely available online, 2) it can be obtained digitally within two days of requesting it, and 3) it is in a machine readable format (for example in csv or xml format).

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) information is available but in some cases is incomplete or lacking detail, 2) obtaining complete information takes up to a month, or 3) it's not necessarily digital or in machine readable format.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) the information is not publicly available, or 2) obtaining it takes more than three months, or 3) the cost of obtaining it is prohibitive for the regular citizen.

        Sources
        1. Information request issued to Central Election Commission asking for expenses of Social Democratic Party for 2013, June-July 2014.
        2. Financing of Political Parties, 2010, Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina, available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Political-Party-Financing.pdf
        3. Financial Report of Social Democratic Party for 2013, May 2014, Central Election Commission, available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/Documents/revizija/2013/Godisnji/Stranke/008.pdf
        4. Interview: Eldin Karic, director of anti corruption network ACCOUNT, July 25 2014, e-mail
      • expand button!
        28
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent is financial information published in a standardized format?More about indicator

        The Central Election Commission publishes extracts of financial reports of political parties in a standardised format, considering that the parties and candidates are obliged to submit their financial information through standardised report templates.

        The CEC publishes both the tables with general overviews of all the parties' income and expenses and overall amounts from different sources, for the purpose of comparison, and the the extracts from reports for each each party and candidate that submitted the reports.

        The published reports contain the same information, and are presented in the same standardised manner for each party, both in case of annual and election reports.

        The CEC also publishes additional information with comparison of e.g. parties' income from budget allocations over a period of time, or graphic comparisons of parties' campaign expenditures.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where financial information for all political parties and individual candidates is available to the public in a standardized format.

        A 50 score is earned where only part of the information is published in a standardized format. A 50 score is also earned where the information is standardized, but it doesn't cover all political parties and individual candidates.

        A 0 score is earned where financial information is not available in a standardized format.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        2. The Structure of Sources of Financing of Political Parties in 2013 (2014), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2013/PRILOG3Strukturaizvorafinansiranjapolitickihstranakau2013godini.pdf
        3. Financial Reports of Political Parties for 2013 (2014), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2013/PRILOG3Strukturaizvorafinansiranjapolitickihstranakau2013godini.pdf
        4. Information on Budget Allocations for Political Parties in 2010 (2011), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2010/Info/Informacija.pdf
        5. Information on Post-Election Financial Reports of Political Parties and Independent candidates - General Elections 2010 (2011), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents//documents/revizija/2010/InfoRev23122010.pdf
        6. Post-Election Financial Reports of Political Subjects for General Elections 2010 (2011), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=211&Lang=3&Tag=19
      • expand button!
        29
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent do mainstream journalism media outlets use political finance data in their reporting?More about indicator

        The mainstream media in BiH, i.e. TV, daily and weekly newspapers, use information on political finance mainly through publishing reports and press releases of the Central Election Commission or civil society organisations, or covering conferences organised by CSOs. On the other hand, online news media, that are generally less constrained with deadlines or other (e.g. political) pressures, publish articles based on political finance information more often - mainly at the time when Central Election Commission publishes audit reports of political parties.

        However, the media reports lack of investigative in-depth reporting, and are either published in the form of short news, or include extracts from Central Election Commission combined with comments and statements from CSOs and expert analysts.

        The exception is Centre for investigative reporting, an independent organisation for investigative reporting, that published a series of articles about abuses of public funds by political parties, connections between companies with contracts with governments and party donors, etc. These stories were re-published by other mainstream media.

        Additionally, the information is often selectively used by the media, depending on which party is supported by a specific media outlet (e.g. during the election campaign for General Elections 2010, one of the candidates for the presidency and a president of a political party Stranka za bolju buducnost, as an owner of daily newspapers Dnevni Avaz and TV station Alfa TV, used his media outlets to publish information against his political opponents and other political parties).

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where at least three independent mainstream journalism media outlets have used officially published political party or individual candidate financial information as part of their reporting.

        A 50 score is earned where one independent mainstream journalism media outlet has used officially published financial information as part of its reporting.

        A 0 score is earned where no mainstream journalism media outlet has used officially published financial information as part of its reporting.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Renata Radic Dragic, Editor, Centre for investigative reporting, July 21 2014, Centre for investigative reporting office in Sarajevo.
        2. Parties Spent 10 Million KM on 2010 Election Campaign, How Much Will They Spend Now?, by Edita Gorinjac, Klix.ba, July 23 2014, available at: http://www.klix.ba/vijesti/bih/na-izborima-2010-stranke-potrosile-10-miliona-km-na-kampanje-koliko-ce-sada/140723031
        3. Political Party Financing: What is the Price of Democracy?, by Ajdin Perco, Novo Vrijeme, June 24 2014, available: http://novovrijeme.ba/finansiranje-politickih-stranaka-kolika-je-cijena-demokratije/
        4. 20 million KM is Allocated from the Budget Every Year for Political Parties, by B.A., Vijesti.ba, April 28 2014, available at: http://www.vijesti.ba/vijesti/bih/211703-finansiranje-politickih-stranaka-svake-godine-budzeta-izdvoji-miliona.html
        5. The winners of tenders donate political parties, by Centre for Investigative Reporting, January 15 2011, available at: http://www.cin.ba/pobjednici-tendera-doniraju-vodece-stranke/
        6. Silajdzic took private television to Monaco on state funds, by F.Vele, Dnevni Avaz, p. 3, available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/37614805/Dnevni-avaz-broj-5401-17-9-2010
        7. Kamber's amendment for financing campaign, by M. Dedic, Dnevni Avaz, April 4 2010, available at: http://www.idoconline.info/digitalarchive/public/index.cfm?fuseaction=serve&elementid=698862
        8. Parties Spend Public Funds Without Control, by Mirna Sadikovic, Radio Slobodna Evropa, April 29 2014, available at: http://www.slobodnaevropa.org/content/stranke-bez-kontrole-tro%C5%A1e-novac-poreskih-obveznika/25366857.html
      • expand button!
        30
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent were there no news reports or other documented incidents of violation or abuse of political finance laws?More about indicator

        The audit reports published by the Service for Audit of Financial Reports of Political Parties within Central Election Commission every year point out numerous violations of political finance laws and regulations, including: violations of campaign expenditure limits, the failure to report all contributions, receiving contributions from illegal sources, the failure to report campaign expenditures, etc. By reviewing the audit reports for 2010 (the year of last general elections), based on the sample of 8 political parties - 7 out of 8 parties were found to be in breach of one or more articles of the Law on Financing of Political Parties. The audit reports are published on the CEC website and used by media in their reports, even though the audit reports are usually published 2 years after the campaigns.

        Additionally, civil society organisations publish election campaign monitoring reports pointing out cases of abuse of public funds for the purpose of election campaigns and other law violations.

        Numerous media reports were published regarding the violations related to the election campaign for the last general elections 2010, including the cases of public institutions using public funds to run campaigns that directly promote political parties whose members are directors of these institutions (e.g. Minsitry of Energy of federation of BiH campaign that promotes the achievent of Party for BiH; the movie of the Government of Republic of Srpska that promotes only the members of the ruling party) and the avoidance of parties to report fees for singers performing at their campaign events (the case of SNSD, the ruling party in Republic of Srpska that did not report the fee to a famous singer who performed twice at the SNSD events during their campaign in 2010), sanctions for political parties, etc.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where there were no news reports or other documented incidents of violation or abuse of political finance laws during the most recent national election.

        A 50 score is earned where there were news reports or other documented incidents of no more than two cases of violation or abuse of political finance laws during the most recent national election.

        A 0 score is earned where there were frequent news reports or other documented incidents of violation or abuse of political finance laws during the most recent national election.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Svetlana Cenic, Public Finance Expert, July 18 2014, Phone
        2. Interview: Renata Radic Dragic, Editor, Centre for Investigative Reporting, July 21 2014, Centre for Investigative Reporting Office in Sarajevo
        3. Reports on Audit of Financial Reports of Political Parties for 2010, Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=348&Lang=3
        4. Monitoring of Election Campaign: General Elections 2010, March 2011, Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina, available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Monitoring-kampanje-final.pdf
        5. SNSD and SDA Did Not Report Donations of Ceca and Hari Varesanovic, by Centre fo Investigative Reporting, published by Klix.ba, August 16 2012, available at: http://www.klix.ba/vijesti/bih/snsd-i-sda-nisu-prijavile-donacije-cece-i-harija-varesanovica/120816137
        6. Through Abuse of Public Funds to Election Points, by Intermezzo, September 1 2010, available at: http://intermezzo.ba/2010/09/zloupotrebom-javnih-sredstava-do-izbornih-poena/
      • expand button!
        31
        Score
        25
        In practice, to what extent were there no news reports or other documented incidents of vote-buying?More about indicator

        During the election campaign for the last General Elections in 2010, a series of media articles was published about citizen testimonies of the party Narodna stranka radom za boljitak who promised voters a fee of 100 KM (70 USD) in return for their votes. The citizens of municipality Cazin even protested in the streets for not receiving the promised fees. The protests and testimonies led to an increased media attention regarding the practices of vote buying of this party. The incidents led to investigative reports from media and CSOs.

        The same issue continued to be the centre of media attention in 2014, since charges were raised against three members of Narodna stranka radom za boljitak for vote buying.

        There were no other major investigative reports related to specific cases of vote buying recently, apart from analyses on policies on vote buying, and general practice of election fraud and election irregularities.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where there were no news reports or other documented incidents of vote-buying during the most recent national election.

        A 50 score is earned where there were news reports or other documented incidents of no more than two cases of vote-buying during the most recent national election.

        A 0 score is earned where there were frequent news reports or other documented incidents of vote-buying during the most recent national election.

        Sources
        1. Party Radom za boljitak Accused of Vote Buying, by Dzenana Karabegovic, Radio Slobodna Evropa, December 28 2010, available at: http://www.slobodnaevropa.org/content/strankaradomzaboljitakoptuzujuzakupovinu_glasova/2261711.html
        2. From Buying Votes to Lijanovic's Progress, by Centre for Investigative Reporting, March 12 2014, available at: http://www.cin.ba/kupovinom-glasova-do-lijanovicevog-boljitka/ 3.Ne Evidence for Vote Buying, by Davud Muminovic, Nezavisne Novine, September 6 2010, available at: http://www.nezavisne.com/novosti/bih/Nema-dokaza-za-kupovinu-glasova-69038.html
        3. How to Stop the "Bulgarian train"?, by Samira Degirmendzic, Dnevni Avaz, July 5 2014, available at: http://www.avaz.ba/vijesti/teme/kako-zaustaviti-bugarski-voz1
        4. Interview: Renata Radic Dragic, Editor, Centre for Investigative Reporting, July 21 2014, Centre for Investigative Reporting office in Sarajevo
      • expand button!
        32
        Score
        75
        In practice, to what extent do civil society organizations use political finance data?More about indicator

        Political finance is not a popular issue among civil society organisations in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the data on political funding is regularly used only by two CSOs. During election periods, the number of CSOs dealing with election issues increases, but most of their initiatives promote voting, measure the general effectiveness of political parties and fulfillment of their campaign promises, or push for gender and minority issues in election campaigns.

        The exception is Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina that is the only organisation that publishes regular reports on monitoring the legal framework and implementation of laws on political party funding, files reports against political parties for law violations, and undertakes monitoring of election campaign expenditure.

        Other organisations, such as Centre for Civic Initiatives, occasionally use political finance data in their media appearances or statements, but are not engaged in the issue on a program or project basis. There are also local organisations, such as Centre for Humane Politics that point out to irregularities in political finance, based on leaks that they receive, or based on occurrences on the local level.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where at least three civil society organizations have used officially published political party or individual candidate financial information as part of their advocacy or awareness work.

        A 50 score is earned where one civil society organization has used officially published financial information as part of its advocacy or awareness work.

        A 0 score is earned where no civil society organization has used officially published financial information as part of its work.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Adis Arapovic, Program Manager, Centre for Civic Initiatives, July 30 2014, e-mail
        2. Interview: Eldin Karic, director, Anti-Corruption Network ACCOUNT, July 25 2014, e-mail
        3. Political Party Financing ahead of General Election 2014, May 2014, Transparency International BiH, available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Finansiranaje-politickih-partija-pred-Opste-izbore-2014-.pdf
        4. Monitoring of election Campaign - General Elections 2010, March 2011, Transparency International BiH, vailable at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Monitoring-kampanje-final.pdf
        5. Center for Humane Politics: Bought Elections and Stolen Public Funds in Doboj, by FENA, June 19 2013, available at: http://www.klix.ba/vijesti/bih/centar-za-humanu-politiku-u-doboju-su-kupljeni-izbori-i-pokraden-budzetski-novac/130619133
        6. Election Rights in Danger, while Prosecutors are on Vacation, by Center for Humane Politics, August 4 2010, available at: http://www.chpngo.org/ostale-aktivnosti/saopstenja-za-javnost/198-ugrozena-izborna-prava-a-tuzioci-na-odmoru.html
        7. Politics that Citizens Pay Dearly, by Eldina Pleho, Osservatiorio Balcani e Caucaso, July 18 2010, available at: http://www.balcanicaucaso.org/bhs/zone/Bosna-i-Hercegovina/Politika-koju-skupo-placaju-gradani-77949 8.How to Save 300 million KM in 2014, or How the Governments Could Surprise Us Before Elections, by Adis Arapovic, Istinomjer, April 4 2014, available at: http://istinomjer.ba/kako-u-2014-ustediti-300-miliona-km-ili-kako-bi-nas-vlade-mogle-iznenaditi-izbora/
      • expand button!
        33
        Score
        --
        Open Question: Have there been political finance legal reforms or reform bills presented to the legislature in the last 10 years?More about indicator

        Since its adoption in 2000, the Law on Political Party Finance was amended three times - in 2009, 2010, and 2012. The amendments in 2009 and 2010 included increases of limits on contributions to political parties, and changes in the distribution of public funds to political parties on the national level. The most direct changes to the law occurred in 2012, with the adoption of a practically new law. It again increased the limits to contributions of political parties, and a provision has been introduced which prescribes that a party member may remit an amount up to 10.300 USD (including membership fee) within a year. It also introduced new sources of financing for political parties - the profit from publishing activities, the sales of promotional materials and profit from organising campaign events; and the loans from banks.The new law also introduced exceptions to the bans on contributions from public institutions referring to the use of offices, and allowed donations from companies that have contracts with governments if the contracts do not exceed 6890 USD. Even though the new provisions also brought improvements in terms of bylaws that allow publishing the identities of contributors, and the law itemized sanctions for different law violations, the aforementioned changes liberalized the previous provisions to an extent.

        There were other attempts of amending the law in 2011 and 2008, by creating inter-sectoral working groups for amendments to the law on political party finance, that consisted of representatives of parliament, council of ministers and Central Elections, but the proposed amendments could not be agreed by the majority of group members.

        Additionally, according to the CEC annual reports (for 2011 and 2012), it has in more occasions initiated the amendments to the Law on Political Party Finance and has also given recommendations for improvements in their official reports, but the lack of political will and agreement prevented the recommendations to be improved, even when the CEC participated in the working groups for law amendments.

        The same is with the initiatives filed by CSOs, that even submitted the proposals (TI BiH in 2011) to the amendments to the parliament, and were supported by the CEC, but were never taken into consideration.

        All attempts for amending the law were followed by strict recommendations from the international institutions, including the GRECO recommendations that have for years stressed the importance of improving the legal framework. However, the end result of the activities on amendments by the government are mostly technical amendments or enabling the parties more opportunities for finance and raising the limits to contributions.

        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - The main initiator for changes in laws regarding the financing of political parties were local NGO's Transparency international BiH and Centres for Civil Initiatives , which were supported and financed by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) from the US. The Central Election Commision of BiH, which had representatives in the working group which made draft of changes in the existing law, also played a role.

        TI BiH insisted on more radical changes, especially when it came to effective control over spending in election campaigns and stricter sanctions for breaking the law.

        On the other side were parliamentary political parties, who weren't really interested in radical changes especially when it came to stricter control over spending. Essentially, the only change in which political political parties were interested was increasing the maximum allowed amount of contribution from individuals and legal persons.

        In the end, the proposals for radical changes which would bring increased transparency were simply ignored by parliament. The changes adopted instead didn't resulted in significantly improved transparency.

        Also, the general public never showed significant interest in political financing, so for political parties it was easy to ignore this issue.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please list and describe all documented instances of: 1) political finance reforms, including bills passed, executive orders signed, court rulings and any other legal act that had a direct effect on existent political finance regulation, and 2) all legal reform attempts presented to the legislature even if they were not approved. Please describe the political context that produced the reforms or reform attempts.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Amendments to the Law on Political Party Finance, 2010, available at: http://izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/POZOFPP110508web-BOS.pdf
        2. The Law on Amendments to the Law on Political Party Finance, 20o9, available at: https://www.parlament.ba/sadrzaj/zakonodavstvo/ranije_usvojeni/default.aspx?id=26273&langTag=bs-BA&pril=b
        3. The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012) available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        4. Monitoring of Political Party Finance 2010-2011 (2011) Transparency Internaional Bosnia and Herzegovina, available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Monitoring-finansiranje-partija-2011.pdf
        5. Report on the Implementation of Laws under the Authority of Central Election Commission for 2011, April 2012, Central Election Commission, available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/CIK/God-Izvjestaji/2011/Izvjestajoprovodenju-bos.pdf
        6. Prevent Abuses in Party Finance, by B. Turkovic, November 6 2011, Dnevni Avaz, available at: http://www.idoconline.info/digitalarchive/public/index.cfm?fuseaction=serve&elementid=752703
        7. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        8. Evaluation Report on Bosnia and Herzegovina on Transparency of Party Funding – Third Evaluation Report, Council of Europe, Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), May 2011, available at: http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/evaluations/round3/GrecoEval3%282010%295BiHTwo_EN.pdf
  • expand button!

    Third Party Actors

    More about category
    composite
    0
    • expand button!
      Applicability of the Law to Third-Party Actors
      More about category
      • expand button!
        34
        Score
        NO
        In law, third-party actors (foundations, think tanks, unions, political action committees, etc.) report itemized contributions received and expenditures to an oversight authority and the information is made publicly available.More about indicator

        There are no specific regulations regarding the reporting on election campaign activities of third-party actors, and the laws regulating political finance prescribe the rules only for parties and candidates. All other actors are subjected to the laws regulating their respective fields, such as laws on non-profit organisations and foundations, that also include unions since they are registered as citizen associations.

        The Law on Associations and Foundations of BiH and the entity level laws prohibit some of these actors from engaging in election campaigns and collecting funds for political parties or candidates. It also prescribes the obligation on annual reporting, which includes contributions, to the Ministry of Justice for the entities that are receiving public funds or are registered as associations of public interest.

        However, even for those third party actors not specifically banned from participating in campaigns, there are no specific regulations regarding the reporting on contributions or expenditures related to the support of election campaigns. Moreover, political action committees are not recognized by the legal system in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) third-party actors are required to report to the oversight authority itemized contributions received and expenditures related to their support of electoral campaigns, and 2) the information must be publicly available.

        A MODERATE score is earned where third-party actors are required to report itemized contributions received and expenditures related to their support of electoral campaigns, but the information is not required to be publicly available. A MODERATE score is also earned where regulations exist, but only apply to electoral campaigns of one actor (whether political party or individual candidate).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Associations and Foundations of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2001, 2003, 2008, 2011, available at: http://mpu.ks.gov.ba/sites/mpu.ks.gov.ba/files/ZakonUdruzenjaFondacije32-01.pdf http://www.fmks.gov.ba/kultura/legislativa/bih/10.pdf http://www.mpr.gov.ba/biblioteka/zakoni/bs/7611BJ_Udruzenja.pdf
        2. The Law on Associations and Foundations of Republic of Srpska, 2001 and 2005, available at: http://www.podaci.net/gBiH/propis/Zakono_udruzenjima/Z-ufonda03v0152-0542.html3.
        3. The Law on Associations and Foundations of Federation of BiH, 2002, available at: http://www.fbihvlada.gov.ba/bosanski/zakoni/2002/zakoni/47_bos.htm
      • expand button!
        35
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent do third-party actors (foundations, think tanks, unions, political action committees, etc.) report itemized contributions received and expenditures to an oversight authority?More about indicator

        Since the legal system in BiH does not recognize the practice of third-party actors running election campaigns in favor of candidates or parties or collecting contributions for election campaigns, they do not report itemized campaign expenditure. The political finance oversight authority, i.e. the Central Election Commission receives and audits only the reports of parties and candidates running for elections.

        Third-party actors are only indirectly involved, through the practice of receiving donations from public funds with the purpose of organising activities that will be used for the promotion of ruling political parties, or in cases when unions or veteran associations that are mostly funded by public funds openly support ruling political parties. Even though the citizen associations are not allowed to campaign for parties and candidates, or to collect funds for them, in these cases, they receive funds from regular budget project-based donations and their support to certain parties is not directly financial, therefore this practice is not strictly forbidden by law and is an example of using the legal loopholes.

        Even though all organisations financed from the public funds must render financial reports, including how publicly sourced funds were spent, to tax authorities, the itemized reports are not published, and information on the level of detail included in such reports is unavailable to the public.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where all third-party actors report to an oversight authority both itemized contributions received and itemized expenditures.

        A 50 score is earned where third-party actors report to an oversight authority either itemized contributions received or expenditures, but not both. A 50 score is also earned where the reports refer only to one type of third-party actor, but do not cover others.

        A 0 score is earned where third-party actors rarely or never report itemized contributions received or expenditures.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Adis Arapovic, Program Manager, Centre for Civic Initiatives, July 30 2014, e-mail
        2. Phantom Organisations in Service of Political Parties, by EBrcko, March 31 2014, Available at: http://www.ebrcko.net/vijesti-brcko/18264-fantomske-organizacije-u-sluzbi-politickih-partija
        3. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
      • expand button!
        36
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent can journalists and citizens easily access the financial information of third party actors, including the political spending of those actors in support of political parties and individual candidates?More about indicator

        In Bosnia and Herzegovina there is no visible practice of political action committees or similar third party actors collecting contributions in order to promote a certain party or advocate against a candidate or a party. However, there is a practice of parties in power using their positions in governmental bodies to transfer funds to organisations (sports associations, NGOs, veteran associations, etc.) or media in order to enable additional promotion during the election campaign.

        The information on the funds allocated for these purposes can be accessed through Official Gazzettes (published periodically depending on the frequency of governments decisions, approximately every 5-7 days), where all governmental decisions are published, which are not widely followed by citizens, or through requests for information (in which case it takes approximately 1-2 months to acquire information) to institutions that allocated the funds to these organisations. In this case the journalist or citizen must already have some information on potential cases of this practice in order to know what information to request. When and if acquired, the information is in the format of pdf or hard-copy documents. Therefore, acquiring this type of information requires research and expertise, thus citizens are informed through journalists' and media or CSOs reports.

        When it comes to third parties' obligations, they are expected to file reports to taxation authorities (entity level tax authorities, i.e. institutions in charge of collecting direct taxes) and, if financed on a project basis, to the authority that awarded the aforementioned fund. This information can be received upon request, if it does not include personal information or other exemptions from the Freedom of Access to Information Act. However, media reports suggests that there is no appropriate oversight of the expenditure and use of these funds. Additionally, publicly financed organizations are not obliged to and do not publish the reports on the expenditure of public funds, nor their activities.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) all relevant financial information is freely available online or in hard copy at the cost of photocopying, 2) it can be obtained within two days of requesting it, and 3) it is in a machine readable format (for example in csv or xml format).

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) information is available but in some cases is incomplete or lacking detail, 2) obtaining complete information takes up to a month, or 3) it's not necessarily in machine readable format.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) the information is not publicly available, or 2) obtaining it takes more than three months, or 3) the cost of obtaining it is prohibitive for the regular citizen.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Svetlana Cenic, Public Finance Expert, July 18 2014, Phone
        2. Government millions for private media in RS, by Centre for Investigative Reporting, February 22 2012, available at: http://www.cin.ba/vladini-milioni-za-privatne-medije-u-rs-u/
        3. Political Promotion Through Sports, by CIN, Al Jazeera Balkans, November 3 2012, http://balkans.aljazeera.net/vijesti/sportom-do-politicke-promocije
      • expand button!
        37
        Score
        --
        Open Question: Please describe how third party-actors (even if they are not regulated by your country's laws) obtain contributions and spend in support of political parties and/or individual candidates.More about indicator

        The practice of using third-party actors for promotion of certain political parties in BiH is characterized by the use of public funds by ruling political parties in order to support associations and foundations (unions, veteran associations, student unions, sports associations, etc.), which can then indirectly contribute to electoral campaigns.

        The examples published in the media detect the following practices: - Financing projects of associations, that involve events or publications that will be used as a promotion of a certain political party before the elections; - Registering fictive NGOs that receive funds from the budget in order to indirectly finance election campaigns; - Instrumentalization of associations with public funding in order to provide support for the elections. - Using religious communities that are also financed from the budget, to support a certain national party.

        There is no visible practice of third-party actors directly collecting contributions in order to implement actual election campaigns for or against a certain party or a candidate (not counting the NGOs awareness raising campaigns related to the election process). However, the individual amounts of public grants for such organisations, based on the sourced examples, represent around 1/10 of overall campaign costs for the parties in power. When summed up, the grants allocated over time present a significant contribution to the parties campaign costs.

        Additionally, considering that unions and associations of veterans, pensioners, students, or religious communities have a great impact on the voters, this practice is even more dangerous, especially having in mind that the real motives of financing these projects are hidden behind the genuine support of official authorities to support these associations. During the 2010 general elections, for example, the basketball club Igokea from Aleksandrovac, RS, received a grant from the budget of the Republic Srpska (RS) 500.000 KM (USD 333.000). At that time prime minister of the RS Milorad Dodik, was also honorary president of this club, and the club was later seen to support Dodik's party.

        Scoring Criteria

        To answer this question please: 1) list the types of third-party actors that exist in your country and describe how they work to influence campaigns, 2) explain how important such actors are or not in the context of campaigns, including whether their expenditures are substantial in relation to that of political parties and individual candidates, and 3) if documented evidence indicates they circumvent laws intended to regulate political finance, please explain how and include references to the evidence.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        2. Interview: Svetlana Cenic, Public finance expert and analyst, July 18 2014, Phone.
        3. Political Promotion Through Sports, by CIN, Al Jazeera Balkans, November 3 2012, http://balkans.aljazeera.net/vijesti/sportom-do-politicke-promocije
        4. Phantom Organisations in Service of Political Parties, by EBrcko, March 31 2014, Available at: http://www.ebrcko.net/vijesti-brcko/18264-fantomske-organizacije-u-sluzbi-politickih-partija
        5. Lijanovic Gives 68 Million to His Associations, by A. Ducic, Dnevni Avaz, January 17 2013, available at: http://www.avaz.ba/vijesti/teme/lijanovic-dijeli-68-miliona-km-svojim-udruzenjima
  • expand button!

    Monitoring and Enforcement

    More about category
    composite
    64
    • expand button!
      Monitoring Capabilities
      More about category
      • expand button!
        38
        Score
        YES
        In law, political finance information is monitored by an independent oversight authority.More about indicator

        Political finance information is monitored by Central Election Commission, i.e. the Audit Service for Financial Reports within the CEC. The CEC has a mandate to verify the accuracy of reports, undertake regular audits and is "authorized to investigate all cases where the provisions of [the Law on Political Party Finance] were not acted upon, and it may order certain persons to provide their written answers in order to ensure documented and other evidence, and to obtain witnesses’ statements regarding the investigation eventually initiated by the Central Election Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Central Election Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina may independently or upon a filed complaint initiate an investigation or undertake appropriate measures." The CEC is also authorised to determine whether a political party or other person violated the Law on Political Party Finance or the Election Law and to pronounce sanctions for law violations.

        When it comes to the CEC independence, it is managed by 7 members of CEC (2 Bosniaks, 2 Croats, 2 Serbs and 1 representative of other peoples). They are elected by the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, after the nomination by the Commission for Selection and Nomination, that consists of seven members out of whom two are appointed by the President of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council from amongst members of the Council, three members are appointed by the Administrative Commission of the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, from amongst members of the Commission and two are appointed by the President of the CEC from the members of the CEC. The Election Law also prescribes that members of the CEC "may not hold any office in the bodies of a political party, association or foundations organizationally or financially related to the political party, and may not be involved in any political party activity."

        The Election Law also states that members of the CEC shall not be held criminally or civilly liable for any acts carried out within the scope of their duties and obligations which are provided by Election law other laws the CEC implements. This immunity may be invoked by the members of the CEC at any time for the acts committed within the scope of their duties and obligations in the CEC,but may not be treated as a general impediment preventing criminal prosecution or the institution of civil proceedings against them. The CEC reports to the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH that discusses and supervises the institutions' efficiency and adopts the annual reports. In conclusion, in law there are grounds set for the independence of the CEC, apart from the fact that they are elected by the parliament, that is consisted of the representatives of political parties to which the laws that CEC implements apply.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) an independent oversight authority is mandated to monitor political finance information, and 2) the authority has investigation and audit powers.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the independent oversight authority is mandated to monitor political finance information, but doesn't have investigation or audit powers.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. Election Law of BiH (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014), Article 2. Available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/English/Laws/ElectionLawof_BiH-eng.pdf
        2. The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012), Article 14, available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
      • expand button!
        39
        Score
        YES
        In law, high-level appointments to the oversight authority are based on merit.More about indicator

        The members of the CEC are nominated by the Commission for Selection and Nomination, that consists of one member of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council, three members of the Administrative Commission of the House of Representatives, and two members of the CEC. This Commission is also in charge of drafting and publishing the advertisement of public competition for the position of the CEC member. The Commission reviews the candidates who applied for the open competition and sets the list of nominees. After the Commission sets the list of nominees, the House of the Representatives elects the members from the list of nominees.

        The Election Law prescribes that the 7 members must be: 2 Bosniaks, 2 Croats, 2 Serbs and 1 representative of other nationalities. The Commission for Selection and Nomination must also consist of the same ethnic structure.

        The Election Law prescribes that the nominees for the position of member of the CEC must be legal experts with experience in the administration of elections and/or electoral experts, and may not hold any office in the bodies of a political party, association or foundations organizationally or financially related to the political party, and may not be involved in any political party activity.

        The President of the CEC is elected from amongst its members. One Croat, one Bosniak, one Serb and one "Other" member of the CEC each serve as the President for one 21 month rotation in a seven years period.

        In conclusion, the rules set grounds for merit-based selection of the CEC members, but this is can be impeded by the prerequisite of nationality, as well as the process of election by the parliament, i.e. political parties.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) high-level appointments must be based on merit in a public appointment process; and 2) appointees must be free of conflicts of interest due to personal loyalties, family connections, political party affiliations, business partners or other biases.

        A MODERATE score is earned where high-level appointments must be based on merit in a public appointment process, but the regulations don't forbid appointments involving conflicts of interest or other biases.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        Election Law of BiH (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014), Article 2. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf

      • expand button!
        40
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent are high-level appointments to the oversight authority based on merit?More about indicator

        The members of the CEC are selected through the public competition, by the Commission for Selection and Nomination, that consists of one member of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council, three members of the Administrative Commission of the House of Representatives, and two members of the CEC. The Commission reviews the candidates and sets the list of nominees. After the Commission sets the list of nominees, the House of the Representatives elects the members from the list of nominees.

        Even though by law, the nominees for the position of member of the CEC must be legal experts with experience in the administration of elections and/or electoral experts, and may not hold any office in the bodies of a political party, association or foundations organizationally or financially related to the political party, and may not be involved in any political party activity, the fact that the candidates must be representatives of specific nationalities based on the constitutional setup, presents an obstacle to the merit-based selection of members. Moreover, the national representation is more important than the gender balance.

        An additional obstacle is the parliamentary appointment by the ruling majority of political parties, that might favor political affiliations more than merit and qualifictions. There have not been examples of appointing candidates that do not satisfy the minimal criteria and qualifications set by the law, but the parliament has in the past while voting for the candidates from the list, decided to select the third-ranked candidate rather than the one highest ranked by the selection committee (e.g. in the process of election of new members in 2012, in the case of the selection of the Serb member of CEC, according to the media, the candidates list was first changed, and then the third ranked candidate was elected by the Parliament. See source 1).

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) there is an advertised competition and public vetting process, 2) candidates with the most merit and without conflicts of interest or other biases are appointed.

        A 50 score is earned where the public competition is usually advertised and the vetting process public, but exceptions exist. A 50 score is also earned where candidates with the most merit and without conflicts of interest or other biases are appointed but exceptions exist.

        A 0 score is earned where there's rarely or never a public competition, or appointees are rarely selected on merit or without conflicts of interest or other biases.

        Sources
        1. Disputable Election of New Members of CEC, by Al Jazeera Balkans, December 1 2012, available at: http://balkans.aljazeera.net/vijesti/sporan-izbor-novih-clanova-cik
        2. Interview: Nermina Zaimovic Uzunovic, member of Social Democratic Party of BiH and the MP in the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, July 26 2014, e-mail.
        3. Interview: Adis Arapovic, Program Manager, Centre for Civic Initiatives, July 30 2014, e-mail
      • expand button!
        41
        Score
        YES
        In law, the independence of high-level appointees is guaranteed.More about indicator

        The members of the CEC are protected by the Election Law that guarantees its members immunity from prosecution for any acts carried out within the scope of their duties and obligations which are provided by Election law and other laws the CEC implements. This immunity may be invoked by the members of the CEC at any time for the acts committed within the scope of their duties and obligations in the CEC,but may not be treated as a general impediment preventing criminal prosecution or the institution of civil proceedings against them.

        Additionally, the Law forbids the members to hold any office in the bodies of a political party, association or foundations organizationally or financially related to the political party, and may not be involved in any political party activity.

        The mandate of 7 years for member of CEC is also set to protect them from being replaced upon the change of government and to separate the legislative and executive governments' mandates from the CEC mandates.

        The CEC members cannot be removed from office, unless they are no longer capable of performing their duties, in which case the CEC informs the House of Representatives, that a member can no longer perform their duties, and the House of Representatives elects a new member from the list of nominees.

        The CEC and its internal divisions can independently initiate proceedings and have an authority to regularly undertake audits, and to carry out investigations based on the audit findings or external complaints, and does not need authorisation to proclaim sanctions against parties and candidates. However, parties and candidates can appeal to the Appeal Council of the Court of BiH, that can overturn or confirm the CEC decision, or return the case to CEC for reconsideration.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) appointees have the authority or mandate to review cases and issue decisions, 2) the law establishes security of tenure, and 3) removal or disciplinary actions are based on due process conducted by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        A MODERATE score is earned where appointees have the authority or mandate to review cases and issue decisions, BUT one of the second two conditions mentioned in the YES criteria is not met.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. Election Law of BiH (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014), Article 2. Available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/English/Laws/ElectionLawofBiH-eng.pdf 2.The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012), Articles 14, 15 and 16. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLaw_new.pdf
      • expand button!
        42
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent is the independence of high-level appointees guaranteed?More about indicator

        The independence of members of the Central Election Commission is demanded by the law and their security of tenure is also guaranteed, and the candidates are selected through public competitions. However, the candidates are selected by a commission which consists of a majority of parliament members, and appointees are elected and confirmed by the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH.

        This mechanism does not provide a full guarantee of independence, since the members are elected by representatives of political parties that the CEC later oversees and can be influenced by the parties that support the members' election.

        For example, one of the former members ofthe Central Election Commission later became a leader of the Social Democratic Party, which indicates that there are connections between members of the CEC with political parties, and that such linkages may impinge upon the CEC's ability to review cases and issue decisions without being subject to party influence.

        A number of parties and candidates filed complaints against the CEC claiming that the members are influenced by political parties, while the CSOs warned about the self-censorship of the members in the process of implementing the laws on conflict of interests.

        Furthermore, there were instances (e.g.during the constitution of government after the General Elections 2010) when political parties openly distributed high-level positions in institutions, including the CEC, between each other, officially recognizing that the appointments in institutions that should be independent are decided based on the political party support.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. The current president of the CEC, Stjepan Mikic, was elected to the CEC in 2005. Prior to his election, he was the chief of staff of the Croatian president of the BiH. He had also served as a member of parliament, and as a deputy to the Parliament's speaker in the House of Representatives in the parliament of the Federation of BiH. In short, he was a professional politician, and as such, may be subject to fear and favor in some cases.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where all of the following conditions are met: 1) appointees review cases and issue decisions without fear or favor from other branches of government, and 2) appointees are granted security of tenure and 3) no appointees are removed, disciplined or transferred without due process by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        A 50 score is earned where any of the following conditions apply: 1) appointees generally operate without fear or favor from other branches of government but exceptions exist, or 2) some but not all appointees are granted security of tenure, or 3) appointees are occasionally removed, disciplined or transferred without due process by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        A 0 score is earned where at least one of the following conditions apply: 1) appointees operate with fear or favor from other branches of government, or 2) are not granted security of tenure, or 3) are usually removed, disciplined or transferred without observing due process by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        Sources
        1. Distribution of Agencies on Political Party Lines is Illegal, by Buka, January 14 2012, available at: http://www.6yka.com/novost/18007/raspodjela-agencija-po-stranackoj-liniji-je-nelegalna
        2. Interview: Nermina Zaimovic Uzunovic, member of Social Democratic Party of BiH and the MP in the House of Representatives of Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, July 26 2014, e-mail.
        3. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        4. Interview: Adis Arapovic, Program Manager, Centre for Civic Initiatives, July 30 2014, e-mail
        5. We Worked Under Strong Political Pressures, by N24, November 3 2010, available at: http://www.n24.ba/novost/13575/Radili-smo-pod-snaznim-politickim-pritiskom 6.The Law for Party Interests, by Srdjan Blagovcanin, July 13 2014, Al Jazeera Balkans, available at: http://balkans.aljazeera.net/vijesti/zakon-za-vlastite-i-stranacke-interese

        Reviewer's sources:

        Official CV of Stjepan Mikic, available at the CEC BiH website: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=42&Lang=3&Id=32, accessed in September, 2014

      • expand button!
        43
        Score
        --
        Open Question: How does decision-making work in the oversight authority?More about indicator

        The oversight and audit of the political finance reports is undertaken by the Audit Service, which is a department within the Central Election Commission, and currently has 5 auditors, including the head of the department. The CEC is managed by 7 appointees (2 Bosniaks, 2 Croats, 2 Serbs and 1 representative of other peoples). The President of the CEC is elected from amongst its members. One Croat, one Bosniak, one Serb and one "Other" member of the CEC each serve as the President for one 21 month rotation in a seven years period.

        After the Audit Service has reviewed the financial reports, and drafted the audit reports, it submits its findings to the members of the CEC. The members adopt the report, and the law violations are identified. The parties in breach of the law are informed and invited to give statements about the finding, after which the sanctions are recommended for each party, and the official decisions on pronouncing decisions are made at the sessions of CEC, by voting of the members. Decisions are made by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the total number of the members. If a decision cannot be reached by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the total number of members at the first meeting, then at the second meeting a majority of the members shall make the decision.

        According the CEC, members rarely fail to support or endorse the findings of the Audit Service Department when it comes to sanctions. However, since the parties have the right to appeal to the CEC decisions to the Appeal Council of the Court of BiH, there is an increasing practice of the court dismissing the CEC decisions, and returning the case to CEC for the retrial. In those cases, the CEC members decide to dismiss the initial cases and do not insist in providing additional evidence and supporting the initial decision (e.g. the case of sanctioning SNSD for not reporting the fee given to the performer at the campaign events, or the case of sanctions for NSRzB for using the Ministry of Agriculture campaign for the party campaign). This practice has lately undermined the CEC authority.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please describe: 1) the composition of the decision-making body within the oversight authority, 2) the type of decisions it's allowed to make and makes in practice, and 3) in which cases majority is required. If there have been well substantiated complaints about the decision-making process being ineffective or politicized please explain.

        Sources
        1. The Application of Law on Political Party Finance Suspended, by Dnevni Avaz, July 2 2013, available at: http://www.avaz.ba/vijesti/iz-minute-u-minutu/obustavljena-primjena-zakona-o-finansiranju-stranaka
        2. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone 3.Election Law of BiH (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014), Article 2.18. Available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf 4.CEC Suspended the Sanctions for Political Parties: Ceca is Not a Public Service, by Almir Terzic, Oslobodjenje, June 29 2013, available at: http://www.oslobodjenje.ba/vijesti/bih/cik-obustavio-predmete-kaznjavanja-stranaka-nije-ceca-javna-usluga
      • expand button!
        44
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the authority have sufficient capacity to monitor political finance regulations?More about indicator

        The Audit Service within the CEC that is in charge of reviewing and monitoring financial reports of parties and candidates operates with very limited resources compared to the number of parties and reports that they audit every year. For example, 94 parties submitted their annual reports for 2013, and Audit Service only has 5 people on staff for the reviewing and auditing the reports.

        Due to the limited capacity, even though all the parties' reports are audited, the audits are conducted on a sample basis, which is emphasised as a disclaimer in audit reports, saying that saying that, given the sample and due to “the limitations in the account-keeping and internal control systems, there is a possibility that certain material errors might remain undetected.” This means that, for example, one of the biggest parties in BiH, Social Democratic Party of BiH, consists of the main board, 13 cantonal and regional boards, two city boards, 95 municipal boards and a youth forum, but the audit on annual and pre and post-election reports for General Election 2010 was carried out on a sample of the main board, one cantonal board and two municipal boards. Fewer than 25% of reports are in fact reviewed.

        Additionally, due to under-staffing, the audit reports are published with delay and it takes a year and a half between the submission of financial reports and publishing the audit reports on CEC website (e.g. the audit reports for annual and election reports for General Elections 2010 were not published until August 2012).

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) the authority has sufficient budget to monitor all incoming reports, and 2) it has sufficient staff to review all incoming reports.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) the authority has insufficient budget to monitor all incoming reports, or 2) its staff can only review half of all incoming reports.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) the authority can't fulfill most of its essential functions due to budget constraints, or 2) its staff only has the capacity to review 25% or less of all incoming reports.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone 2.The Report on Audit of Annual Financial Report for 2010 and Pre-Election and Post-Election Financial Reports for General Elections 2010 of Social Democratic Party of BiH (2012), Central Election Commission, available at http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2010/Izvjestaj_Revizija/I008-bos.pdf
        2. Information on Submitted Financial Reports of Political Parties for 2013, April 2014, Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/revizija/2013/Informacijaodostizvjestajima2013.pdf
      • expand button!
        45
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent does the authority conduct investigations or audits when necessary?More about indicator

        The Audit Service within the Central Election Commission undertakes regular annual financial audits of the reports of political parties (including annual and pre-election and post-election reports). However, the Audit Service rarely audits the reports of independent candidates, which practically makes it impossible for the public to get an insight into their compliance with regulations on campaign financing.

        The Central Election Commission also receives reports of possible law violations from political parties, civil society organisations and individuals, but these claims are investigated during the process of the regular audit, upon receiving parties' financial reports so that they can be compared to the allegations. However, the CEC does not keep records or publish the number of these reports.

        The CEC can also carry out field audits, i.e. in the premises of political parties, if they find necessary to conduct detailed financial investigation in order to ensure the validity of parties' financial reports. When auditing reports for 2010 (i.e. last general elections), the CEC undertook field audits in case of 16 political parties.

        In conclusion, even though the Central Election Commission can and does undertake additional investigations in terms of field audits within the regular audits, there is no practice of initiating investigations and audits for individual law violations and reacting on the reports on law violations during the campaigns.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where the authority conducted at least three investigations or audits during the most recent electoral campaign.

        A 50 score is earned where the authority conducted at least one investigation or audit during the most recent electoral campaign.

        A 0 score is earned where the authority didn't conduct any investigation or audit during the most recent electoral campaign.

        Sources
        1. The Report on Implementation of Laws in the Authority of Central Election Commission for 2011, Central Election Commission, April 2012, available at: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/CIK/God-Izvjestaji/2011/Izvjestajoprovodenju-bos.pdf
        2. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        3. Monitoring of Election Campaign: General Elections 2010, Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina, March 2011, available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Monitoring-kampanje-final.pdf
      • expand button!
        46
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the authority publish the results of investigations or audits?More about indicator

        The Central Election Commission publishes all reports on audit of financial reports of political parties. They are published annually, but are not timely, since it since it takes almost a year and a half after the financial reports are submitted for the audit reports to be published. For example, the audit reports for 2010 were published in 2012, and the last published audit reports are audit reports for 2012.

        Regarding the information on additional investigations into the violation of regulations related to election campaigns, they are published together with the audit reports, since the investigations of individual complaints are considered at the time of carrying out the regular audit. This means that, in some cases, the results of investigations and audits are published well over a year after their completion.

        The procedures related to imposing sanctions for law violations are also initiated after the completion of audit reports and require the additional time to become induced due to the appeal procedures, and the time required for the Court to make a decision upon a party's appeal. For example, in November 2013 CEC published its decisions to sanction 13 political parties for law violations during the election year 2010. After that, it took additional 6 months for CEC to cease the proceedings in June 2013 against several political parties and overturn its decisions based on the decision of the Court of BiH.

        In conclusion, even though the information on audits and proceedings against political parties are published by the Central Election Commission, they are too tardy to have an effect on elections or the behaviour of political parties during the election campaign.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where the authority publishes reports of all its investigations or audits a month or less after their conclusion.

        A 50 score is earned where reports are available to the public more than a month after the conclusion of the investigation or audit.

        A 0 score is earned where reports are not available to the public or they become available after six months or more after conclusion of the investigation or audit. A 0 score is also earned where only summaries of the reports are publicly available.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Adis Arapovic, Program Manager, Centre for Civic Initiatives, July 30 2014, e-mail
        2. Interview: Renata Radic Dragic, editor, Center for Investigative Reporting, July 21 2014, in-person interview at CIR office in Sarajevo
        3. Interview: Eldin Karic, director, anti-corruption network ACCOUNT, July 25 2014, e-mail
        4. Sanctions for 13 Political Parties: SNSD will be sanctioned with 30.000 KM because of Ceca, by Oslobodjenje, November 30 2012, available at: http://www.sutra.ba/novost/75687/snsd-ce-zbog-cece-biti-kaznjen-30.000-km
        5. CEC Ceased the Proceedings Against Parties: Ceca is Not a Public Service, by Almir Terzic, June 29 2013, available at: http://www.oslobodjenje.ba/vijesti/bih/cik-obustavio-predmete-kaznjavanja-stranaka-nije-ceca-javna-usluga
        6. Reports on Audit and Review of Financial Reports of Political Parties 2010, published in 2012, Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=348&Lang=3
    • expand button!
      Enforcement Capabilities
      More about category
      • expand button!
        47
        Score
        YES
        In law, there are sanctions in response to political finance violations.More about indicator

        The Law on Political Party Financing of BiH prescribes the following financial sanctions for parties and candidates:

        • between 500 and 5000 KM (345 to 3450 USD,cca) for the use of funds that is not prescribed by the law, failure to keep records and issue receipts on contributions as set by the law, and for receiving loans from banks that are more than 25% owned by the state.
        • up to triple the amount of received funds, for receiving the contributions that exceed the prescribed limits; failure to report and to pay to the state budget the exceeding contributions, as well as likely payments of contributions by anonymous sources; failure to report contributions from prohibited sources and failure to transfer the funds to the state budget, as set by the law.

        The Election Law prescribes financial sanction between 1000 and 10000 KM (cca 690 to 6900 USD) for, among other violations exceeding the limit on campaign expenditure, promising financial rewards with the aim of gaining the support of voters.

        However, penalty provisions do not predict sanctions for certain forms of law violations, such as: failure to keep records on income and expenses, apart from membership fees and contributions; failure to keep books; failure to submit financial reports on time and in the manner prescribed by the Central Election Commission, or failing to appoint an authorised person for submitting the financial reports.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) the law clearly defines violations of political finance laws, and 2) there are clearly defined sanctions for specific violations.

        A MODERATE score is earned where violations are clearly defined but sanctions for specific violations are not.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012), Article 19 and 20, available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
        2. Election Law of BiH (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014), Article 19.9. Available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/English/Laws/ElectionLawof_BiH-eng.pdf
      • expand button!
        48
        Score
        YES
        In law, the oversight authority has the power to impose sanctions.More about indicator

        According to the Law on Political Party Finance, any irregularity and a violation of the provisions of this Law observed by the Audit Service are submitted to the Central Election Commission, and if a political party fails to act in compliance with the provisions of this Law, the Central Election Commission is authorized to impose the financial penalty in accordance with this Law and the Election Law of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

        The parties and candidates can appeal to the Appeal Council of the Court of BiH, which has the power to overturn or confirm the CEC decisions.

        However, when it comes to more severe law violations, that might include criminal acts, CEC can only send their information to Prosecutors' Offices that then have the authority to decide whether to start an investigation and raise charges against persons responsible for these violations, and then for the court to trial. The CEC does not have the power to initiate prosecution, only to impose administrative sanctions.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) the oversight authority has the power to impose sanctions, and 2) it can directly prosecute violators before the courts or is independent to send cases to public prosecution.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the oversight authority has the power to impose sanctions, but it can't directly prosecute violators before the courts or is not independent to send cases to public prosecution.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources
        1. The Law on Political Party FInancing, of BiH (2012), Article 15 and 16, available: https://www.izbori.ba/Documents/documents/ZAKONI/PPFLawnew.pdf
      • expand button!
        49
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent do offenders comply with sanctions imposed?More about indicator

        Since the Central Election Commission imposes financial penalties for law violations, and there is an executive procedure through the Court, parties comply with the financial sanctions and there is little space for them to avoid the execution of the sanction. Only in the case of parties that stop being active and cease their operations, the sanctions cannot be implemented.

        However, the audit reports show that parties tend to repeat their violations and audit recommendations are not regularly implemented. Therefore, there are examples of parties who continue to repeat the same violations and pay fines continuously. Each audit report refers to previous audit findings, and by reviewing the last published audit reports (reports published in 2014, carried out for 2012) it is visible that the majority of major parties did not implement the recommendations from previous audits - this includes SNSD, SDP, SDA, HDZ BiH, SDS, PDP, NSRzB. The same is present in audit reports for 2010, referring to the recommendations given in 2009.

        When it comes to independent candidates, CEC does not have a practice of sanctioning them for failure to report contributions and other financial information on their election campaigns, therefore it is not possible to detect whether they would comply with the sanctions.

        In conclusion, even though the parties do not avoid paying fines, the fines do not act as a deterrent for future law violations, and the parties do not implement the recommendations given by the supervisory body.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) offenders comply with the sanctions imposed without exception, and 2) they are not repeat offenders.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) offenders usually comply with the sanctions imposed but exceptions exist, or 2) most are not repeat offenders but some exceptions exist.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) offenders rarely comply with the sanctions imposed, or 2) most are repeat offenders.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        2. Reports on audit of financial reports of political parties for 2010 (2012), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=348&Lang=3
        3. Reports on audit of financial reports of political parties for 2012 (2014), Central Election Commission, available at: http://www.izbori.ba/Default.aspx?CategoryID=502&Lang=3
      • expand button!
        50
        Score
        --
        Open Question: How strong is enforcement, and what impedes more effective enforcement?More about indicator

        The main obstacle to the effective oversight of the financial flows of political parties and candidates lies in the weak legal framework, limited authority, and weak capacities of the Central Election Commission.

        First of all, the regulations prescribing the authority of the CEC in monitoring political finance do not mandate the auditing of parties' individual expenses, which limits the transparency, especially in the light of the fact that approximately 70-80% of parties' income comes from the public funding. Moreover, the CEC does not have the authority to look into the parties' bank transactions, only to register the existence of the accounts, and the use of single bank accounts is not mandatory by law. Additionally, the generalised templates for reporting the information on campaign expenses do not allow public insight into the parties' individual campaign expenses.

        The low fines do not motivate the parties to respect the law since in cases of major law violations, the benefits from law violations are higher than the cost of sanctions. The fact that the individual financing of candidates' campaigns is not reported by parties, nor are the independent candidates' reports audited, leaves this segment of campaign financing in the dark and allows illegal donations and influences on candidates.

        Additionally, it is necessary to strengthen the capacities of the oversight body, so that the law violations can be identified timely, instead of waiting for 2 years after the violations for parties to be sanctioned.

        It is also necessary to amend the legal framework in order to distinguish parties' and candidates' activities from the activities within the duties of public officials, and prevent abuses of institutional funds for the purposes of campaigns and party interests.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - One of the key shortcomings is that existing fines for parties and candidates which breaks the rules about financing campaigns are mostly symbolic.

        Significantly increasing financial penalties could make breaking ruless less likely. But the most effective sanction would be removing candidates from party lists in cases when they seriously breach the law, and in cases in which there are repeated offenders amongst political parties, when it come to financing election campaigns.

        But first thing should be significantly increasing capacity of CEC to control financial reports, through hiring much more investigators and auditors, as the existing number isn't even close to being enough to control all political campaigns, having in mind that during general elections in BiH there are always at least 60-70 different political parties who participate.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please provide a general explanation of the effectiveness of enforcement, describing: 1) any conditions that may prevent effective enforcement, and 2) explain what are the most urgent areas of reform in the country's political finance system.

        Sources
        1. Interview: Sanja Tosovic, auditor in the Audit Service for Financial Reports of Political Subjects, Central Election Commission, August 1 2014, Phone
        2. Interview: Branislav Borenovic, vice president of the Party of Democratic Progress and the MP in the National Assembly of Republic of Srpska, July 31 2014, in-person interview in Banja Luka
        3. Financing of Political Parties Ahead of General Elections 2014, Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina, April 2014, available at: http://ti-bih.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Finansiranaje-politickih-partija-pred-Opste-izbore-2014-.pdf
        4. Interview: Renata Radic Dragic, Editor, Centre for investigative reporting, July 21 2014, Centre for investigative reporting office in Sarajevo

BiH has a bicameral parliamentary system of government, and the country is composed of two semi-autonomous entities, the Federation of Bosnia Herzegovina (FBiH) and the Republic of Srpska (RS). The Brcko District has special status and doesn't belong to any entity but enjoys autonomy. . Of the 42 members of the House of Representatives, 28 are elected in the Federation of BiH, and 14 are elected in the Republic of Srpska. 21 of the Federation representatives are elected in multi-member constituencies under a proportional represenation system, and seven are compensatory mandates elected from the territory of the Federation as a whole. In the Republic of Srpska, nine MPs are elected in multi-member constituencies under proporational representation, and five are compensatory mandates elected from the territory as a whole.

The House of Peoples is composed of 15 delegates, 10 of whom come from the Federation (five Croats and five Bosniaks), and five come from the Republic of Srpska (five Serbs). At the state level, there is Parliament of BiH with two chambers, state government and three member Presidency, which is collective head of state. Members of this body are elected by entity Parliaments.

Members of the Presidency are directly elected, one from Republic of Srpska (must be a Serb) and two from Federation BiH (one Bosniac and one Croat)

The main source of financing political campaigns for parties already represented in parliaments is regular annual transfer from budgets, membership fee from members of political party, income from publishing activity, profit from companies owned by party and contribution from individuals and private companies. Indeed, according to the official financial reports of political parties, most of the funds for the campaigns, as well as for the annual finance, come from the public subsidies awarded from all levels of government (as presented in the indicators related to the public funding). These funds, as well as membership fees, and most of the donations, are controlled and distributed by the parties, and camoaigns are run on the party level. However, candidates (including those nominated by the party) have a possibility to raise their own funds and pay for their individual campaigns, while this part of campaign funding is not reported neither by the party nor by the candidate.

In the 2010 election, the elected members of the presidency were: Zeljko Komsic (Social Democratic Party - SDP), Bakir Izetbegovic (Party of Democratic Action - SDA), and Nebojsa Radmanovic (Alliance of Independent Social Democrats Milorad Dodik - SNSD Milorad Dodik).

The seats in the national Parliamentary Assembly were won by thefollowing parties: SDP 8 seats, SNSD 8 seats, SDA 7 seats, SDS 4 seats, SBB 4 seats, HDZ BiH 3 seats, SBiH 2 seats,Coration coalition HDZ 1990-HSP 2 seats, PDP 1 seat, DNS 1 seat, DNZ BiH 1 seat, and 1 seat as a compensational mandate for NSRZB.