Learn more

composite
69
69

Mexico

In law
89
In practice
57

In Mexico, political finance is highly regulated, both in law and in practice. Parties and candidates are both entitled to receive state funding for campaigns; in practice, they do so. Indirect funding, in the form of advertising slots on radio and television, is also provided. In fact, parties and candidates cannot otherwise buy advertising - they must rely exclusively on the slots allocated to them through the indirect public funding mechanism. In practice, some parties found ways to circumvent the law during the 2012 elections, and obtained more advertising time than was their due. There are also a few instances in which non-financial state resources appear to have been illegally deployed in the 2012 campaign. Independent candidates, though not parties, are prohibited from receiving cash donations; anonymous donations and corporate contributions are totally impermissible. Contributions from individuals are capped, and campaign spending is limited for both parties and candidates. Because of these restrictions, parties rely primarily on public funding for their financing, though individual donors and supporters' donations provide supplementary assistance. During the 2012 elections, several candidates and parties spent more than was legally permissible during the campaign. Legal reporting requirements are stringent, and both parties and candidates are supposed to submit itemized financial reports on a regular basis, both within and outside campaigns. These requirements are the result of a new law passed after the 2012 elections, which means that, during those elections, parties and candidates, in practice, reported less frequently. Their reports generally included a full list of donors, a rare case within the MPT sample. Financial reports submitted to the oversight authority, the INE, are available online, but not all information is available immediately, and data is often uploaded in pdf format. Third party actors in Mexico are prohibited from any sort of campaign activity. In practice, however, such actors engaged in campaigning during the 2012 elections, and they did not report any financial information to the authorities. The recently reformed National Electoral Institute (INE) is charged with oversight of political finance. Many of its appointees, in practice, are selected in merit-based processes, and their independence, for the most part, is protected. The INE is active and well staffed; it carries out investigations and audits regularly its predecessor performed more than 1,000 during the 2012 campaign). Its audits are public, and it often imposes sanctions. However, parties and candidates failed to comply with sanctions regarding 2012, instead going through a lengthy appeals process by which to escape censure. Enforcement is likely to improve due to the recently enacted reforms, though carrying out the full scope of its activities may prove a challenge for the INE.

  • expand button!

    Direct and Indirect Public Funding

    More about category
    composite
    84
    • 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

        According to Mexico's Constitution in article 41, all political parties should receive public funding to undertake their activities and for campaigns. Article 41 in Mexico´s Constitution establishes the basis to renew the Legislative and Executive Powers. In addition, the article states:

        “The law shall guarantee that national political parties have the necessary resources to undertake their activities and it will provide the rules under which political parties´ and their campaigns´ financing should be subject to ensuring that public resources prevail over the source private“.

        The General Political Parties Law in its article 50 establishes that political parties have the right to receive public funding to undertake their regular activities and also for their campaigns. Article 51, establishes the formula to calculate the amount of resources that these should be awarded annually.

        The Federal Institutions and Electoral Procedures Code in article 77 also establishes the type of funding that political parties can use for their campaigns, which includes public funding. Furthermore, article 78 also states that political parties have the right to obtain public funding for the campaigns.

        Regarding independent candidates, the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law in its articles 393, 398 and 407 establish that they have the right to obtain public funding for their campaigns.

        It is important to mention that independent candidates were only recently allowed with the 2013 political reform. During last election, which was held in 2012, independent candidates were not permitted. However, the law that was in force at the time still mentioned that political parties had the right to receive public funding to undertake their campaigns.

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Art. 393, 398, 407 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE_100914.pdf

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Articles 50, 51 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

      • 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

        Article 41 of the Mexican Constitution establishes in a transparent and clear way the amount of resources that all registered political parties must obtain to undertake their activities during an ordinary period and also the amount of resources they must receive for their campaigns in an equitable way. The Constitution establishes that all registered parties are to receive public funds to undertake their activities and also for their campaigns. However, if a party obtains less than 3% of the vote in the most recent election -either for the Presidency, the Senate or the Legislative-, it will lose its registration and thus, public financial resources. Parties must be formally registered with the National Electoral Institution to have access to public resources.

        The formula is proportional and it is based on the total amount of registered voters in the country and also on the constituencies of each party. The Constitution in its article 41 makes a clear differentiation between the amount of resources parties can obtain when Presidential and Legislative Campaigns are undertaken (every 6 years) and how much they can receive when the Legislative is renewed (every 3 years).

        “Public funding for permanent ordinary activities shall be determined annually by multiplying the total number of registered voters by 65% of the daily minimum wage in the Federal District. 30% of the total amount obtained in accordance with the above, will be distributed equally among political parties and the remaining 70% will be distributed among the parties according to the percentage of votes they obtained in the last intermediate Legislative election.

        Public funding for activities to obtain votes during the year in which President, Senators and Federal Legislators are elected, will be equal to 50% of the public funding that political parties obtain for ordinary activities; when Federal Legislators are elected, the amount will be equal to 30% of the funding received for ordinary activities“.

        In addition, the General Political Parties Law, article 51, establishes the mechanism through which political parties can obtain financing for the political campaigns which is in accordance to what is established in the Constitution. This article also establishes the amount of resources that a political party that was registered after the last election can obtain to finance their ordinary activities: 2% of the amount of resources provided to political parties to undertake their ordinary activities. For elections, these new parties will also 50% of the amount received for ordinary purposes.

        For independent candidates, the amount of resources these can obtain for their campaign is established in the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law, article 408, which establishes that the same amount of resources that a newly registered party would receive would be distributed among independent candidates, where 33.3% would go to Presidential Candidates, 33.3% for Legislative, 33.3% for Senate. In case only one independent candidate obtains its registration for any of the above mentioned positions, then the candidate cannot receive more than 50% of the above mentioned resources.

        Finally, the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law, article 31, clearly states that political parties´public funding is not part of the National Electoral Institution and for that reason, it cannot modify the formula or the amount of resources disbursed to parties.

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Article 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Articles 31, 408 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.pdf

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Articles 50-53, 94 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

      • expand button!
        3
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent is the mechanism to determine direct public funding for electoral campaigns transparent, equitable and consistently applied?More about indicator

        The people that were interviewed agreed that the mechanism through which public funds are/were allocated and disbursed to political parties to undertake their activities and to finance their campaigns during the 2012 elections was transparent and equitable.

        Diego de la Mora, a public budgets specialist, stated that “the mechanism is contained in the Constitution and it functions well because every political party oversees the amount of resources allocated to each party. There are internal controls“.

        The resources allocated to political parties for their operation and to undertake their campaigns are provided through the National Electoral Institute, which is an autonomous entity. For this reason, the Institute's General Council is the organ in charge of approving the Institute's budget and the amount of resources that parties will obtain in accordance to the formula established in the Mexican Constitution. It is important to mention that the General Council is integrated with representatives from the political parties, independent electoral counselors, legislative counselors which are proposed by the parliamentary groups in the Legislative.

        According to an report from the Federal Electoral Institute (called the National Electoral Institute after the recent reform), “the monitoring function that political parties undertake during the Federal Electoral Process is not a concession of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), but this is a right that is contained in the Constitution in article 41“. “Therefore, cooperative efforts and the inclusion of the political parties within the institutional framework is the main antidote to the secrecy, mistrust and uncertainty“. With the inclusion of all these actors, there is an effective checks and balance system which works effectively when it comes to the allocation of public resources for parties.

        In addition, the legal framework is very clear on the conditions that political parties (new and old) must meet in order to access public funding for their activities and campaigns.

        The report issued by the IFE before election day in 2012, clearly states the amount of resources that were allocated for political parties and for campaigns, and how these were distributed among them. The report makes a clear link to the mechanism established in the Constitution. Furthermore, each year, the INE publishes in its website the agreement of the General Council regarding the amount resources that each party will receive throughout the fiscal year is reported. This report includes all the information used to determine that amount in accordance with the formula established in the Constitution.

        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
        • Diego de la Mora Budgets and Public Policy Area Coordinator Fundar, Centro de Analisis e Investigación AC August 7, 2014, Mexico City.

        • Oscar Arredondo Researcher Fundar, Centro de Analisis e Investigación AC August 7, 2014

        • Federal Electoral Process 2011-2012 Instituto Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Institute) June 28, 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/CNCS/CNCS-IFE-Responde/2012/Junio/cyaPEF/cyaPEF.pdf

        • Acuerdo del Consejo General del Instituto Nacional Electoral por el que se determinan las cifras de financiamiento público para el sostenimiento de las actividades ordinarias permanentes y para actividades específicas de los Partidos Políticos Nacionales 2014 (Agreement by the INE´s General Council through which Political Parties´ financial resources for ordinary activities and for campaigns are determined 2014) National Electoral Institute (Instituto Nacional Electoral) http://www.ine.mx/docs/IFE-v2/DS/DS-CG/DS-SesionesCG/CG-acuerdos/2014/Enero/CGext201401-14/CGex201401-14ap1.pdf

        • The integration of the General Council of the Federal Electoral Institute. A judicial decision to make the constitutional rule effective. Constancio Carrasco Jurídicas, UNAM http://www.juridicas.unam.mx/publica/librev/rev/juselec/cont/31/dcl/dcl16.pdf

        • Libro Blanco. Proceso Electoral 2011-2012 (White Book. Electoral Process 2011-2012) National Electoral Institute (Instituto Federal Electoral) June 2013 http://www.mexicoevalua.org/mexico-evalua-el-pacto-por-mexico

      • expand button!
        4
        Score
        75
        In practice, to what extent does the entity in charge of public funding make disbursement information publicly available?More about indicator

        The information regarding when and the amount of resources that are disbursed to political parties, since 2013, is published by the National Electoral Institute (INE) one month and a half after resources are disbursed. Before 2013, the information was made available every quarter. This means that during the 2012 election, the INE published the information quarterly on its website. According to political parties´ annual reports (see the PRI´s annual report), in 2012 the party received resources from the INE on a monthly basis, which is in line with the information provided by the INE and it is also in line with article 51 of the Political Parties General Law which establishes that political parties will receive public funds each month.

        The INE makes financial information available on a monthly and quarterly basis. These reports contain aggregated line items on the expenditures the Institute has undertaken during the period in question. It is important to mention that one of the line items which is included in the report is “Financial Support for Political Parties“, which aggregates all the resources that are disbursed to political parties during the fiscal year.

        According to Diego de la Mora, a public budgets expert, financial information from the INE is transparent and available in a timely fashion and in line with the times established for the Federal Public Administration regarding the publication of financial information. However, there is an exception when it comes to the election process. Financial campaign reports from the political parties were to be handed in 60 or even 90 days after the election, making it difficult to monitor and oversee the use of funds effectively.

        However, it is important to mention that during the 2012 election the IFE issued a preliminary report several days before the election, which only included the total amount of resources that each Political Party had received for their campaigns. No preliminary information on the amount spent during the campaign was provided because of what was explained previously by Diego de la Mora.

        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
        • Diego de la Mora Budgets and Public Policy Area Coordinator Fundar, Centro de Analisis e Investigacion AC August 7, 2014, Mexico City.

        • Estado del Ejercicio Presupuestal al mes de Marzo 2012 (First Quarterly Financia Report) Instituto Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Institute) http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/DEA/DEA-PresupuestoInformes/DEA-PresupuestoIFE/PresupuestoIFE-docs/2012/1trimestre_2012.pdf

        • Estado del Ejercicio Presupuestal - Marzo 2014, (Monthly Financial Report - March 2014) Instituto Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Institue) http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/DEA/DEA-PresupuestoInformes/DEA-PresupuestoIFE/PresupuestoIFE-docs/2013/eepjunio2013.pdf

        • Public Resources Disbursed Monthly to the PRI´s National Executive Committee Partido Revolucionario Institucional (Revolutionary Institutional Party) http://pri.org.mx/transformandoamexico/Documentos/Transparencia/Fraccion9/Nacional.pdf

        • Federal Electoral Process 2011-2012 Instituto Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Institute) June 28, 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/CNCS/CNCS-IFE-Responde/2012/Junio/cyaPEF/cyaPEF.pdf

        • Libro Blanco. Proceso Electoral 2011-2012 (White Book. Electoral Process 2011-2012) National Electoral Institute (Instituto Federal Electoral) June 2013 http://www.mexicoevalua.org/mexico-evalua-el-pacto-por-mexico

        • Ley General de Partidos Publicos (Political Parties General Law) Instituto Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Institute) May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

    • expand button!
      Indirect Public Funding
      More about category
      • expand button!
        5
        Score
        YES
        In law, use of state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates is prohibited.More about indicator

        Using public resources in favor or against a political party is prohibited in the Mexican legal framework.

        The Mexican Constitution in its article 134 establishes:

        “ Public servants of the Federation, states and municipalities and the Federal District and its delegations, at all times, have the obligation to apply public resources under their responsibility impartially , without influencing the fairness of competition between political parties“.

        Furthermore, the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law in its article 380 establishes that candidates -precandidates or candidates- cannot accept contributions or donations -cash or in-kind- from the Executive, Legislative or Judicial Powers, from the States, from parastatals and from any other entity within the Federal, State or Municipal Public Administrations.

        In addition, article 449, states that:

        “It is considered a violation of this Code by the Unions Power´s authorities or public officers, local powers, municipal governmental organisms, autonomous organisms and any other public entity:

        c) breach of the principle of fairness established by Article 134 of the Constitution, when such conduct affects the fairness of the competition between political parties and between candidates during electoral processes;

        e) the use of federal, state and municipal social programs and its resources, with the purpose of inducing or coercing citizens to vote in favor or against any political party or candidate“.

        The General Law on Electoral Offences, article 11 establishes that any public officer that allocated, uses or allowed the use of funds, goods or services that it has under its disposition to support or to damage a candidate will be sanctioned with a fine.

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos (Constitution of Mexico) Article 134 1917, relevant article passed on November 13, 2007 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Articles 380, 449 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.pdf

        • Ley General en Materia de Delitos Electorales (General Law on Electoral Offences) Article 11 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/27jun2014_LGMDE.pdf/ca734d82-4e53-4e66-a778-75cd5c703b33

      • expand button!
        6
        Score
        50
        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

        According to the people interviewed, it is very difficult to determine and prove without a doubt if state resources have been used in favor of a candidate during the election process. However, there are numerous stories and testimonies that have led the Mexican society to believe that this is an ongoing practice. Published stories and reports involve financial and non-financial resources, such as the use of media, infrastructure, etc.

        During the last election process, when the President, Legislative and Senate where elected, numerous newspaper articles surfaced which stated that the oldest and larger political parties - PRI, PAN and PRD - were using state resources to benefit their campaigns. However, to date, no one has been found guilty.

        According to Oscar Arredondo, an expert on public budgets, “the National Electoral Institute´s Oversight Unit did not determine if public resources were used in the past election. In practice we know that it happened. We know that many governors lent squares, templates and undertook diverse actions to support a candidate."

        Justine Dupuy, an expert on transparency and accountability issues, mentioned that during the 2012 election two public officers from the State of Veracruz had been detained while arriving in the State of Mexico because they were carrying a bag full of cash; however, the authorities could never determine what that money was for. She mentioned that the the law is closing spaces for corruption and for the illegal use of public resources yet there are still numerous suspicions that these practices are still taking place.

        Oscar Arredondo also mentions that from the society´s side we know that there were numerous irregularities during the election process but from the institutional side it is very difficult to prove.

        According to Fernando Agiss, former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at the National Electoral Institute, “it is extremely difficult and complex to establish that public resources reach a candidate´s campaign. There is so much triangulation that it is very difficult to determine if public resources reached the campaign and if they were used in it. This type of behaviour is considered a crime, it is not only an administrative offense. For this reason, the state apparatus has to investigate all these elements. There are very few cases where the use of public resources in election campaigns are credited“.

        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
        • Justine Dupuy Researcher Fundar Centro de Analisis e Investigacion AC August 7, 2014

        • Oscar Arredondo Researcher Fundar Centro de Analisis e Investigacion AC August 7, 2014

        • Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE Agiss and Associates August 12, 2014

        • El Costo de las Elecciones Presidenciales de 2012 (The Cost of the Presidential Elections 2012) México Evalúa 2012 http://www.scribd.com/doc/124499894/Version-final-de-Costo-electoral

        • PAN y PRD vinculan dinero decomisado a Veracruz con campaña de Peña Nieto (PAN and PRD link Veracruz´s seized money to Peña Nieto´s campaign) CNN Mexico January 30, 2012 http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/01/30/pan-y-prd-vinculan-dinero-decomisado-a-veracruz-con-campana-de-pena-nieto

        • Campaña de Peña Nieto: focos de alarma en Oaxaca, Veracruz, Morelos, Tabasco y Chiapas Peña Nieto´s Campaign: alarms in Oaxaca, Veracruz, Morelos, Tabasco and Chiapas) Jesus Cervantes y Jenaro Villamil Proceso May 14, 2012 http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=307434

        • PRI acusa a AMLO de uso de recursos públicos en su campaña (PRI acuses AMLO of using public resources in his campaign) Mario Castillo Terra July 23, 2012 http://noticias.terra.com.mx/mexico/politica/elecciones/sucesion-presidencial/pri-acusa-a-amlo-de-uso-de-recursos-publicos-en-su-campana,7028f1ee7e6b8310VgnVCM3000009acceb0aRCRD.html

        • El Estado de México niega uso de sus cuentas para apoyar campaña de Peña Nieto (The State of Mexico denies using its accounts to favor Peña Nieto´s campaign) CNN Mexico August 3, 2012 http://blogs.cnnmexico.com/la-grilla/2012/08/03/el-estado-de-mexico-niega-uso-de-sus-cuentas-para-apoyar-campana-de-pena-nieto/

      • 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 Mexican Constitution, article 41, establishes that every registered national political party (newly registered parties and those that obtained at least 3% of total votes in the last election) has the right to the permanent use of the social media and that registered independent candidates have the same privileges but only for electoral purposes. Furthermore, this article also mentions that the National Electoral Institute (INE) is the sole entity in charge of administrating the corresponding time for radio and television. It also establishes the amount of time the INE, political parties and candidates have:

        From the beginning of the pre-campaigns until the day of the elections the INE will have 48 minutes daily which will be distributed in 2 or even 3 minutes for every hour of transmission in each radio station and television channels, from 6am to 12am. During the period between the end of the pre-campaigns and the campaigns, 50% of the time in radio and television will be used for the purposes of the electoral authority and the rest will be used to disseminate generic messages from political parties.

        b) During pre-campaigns, political parties will have up to 1 minute for every hour of transmission in every radio station and television channels.

        c) During the electoral campaigns, in order to cover political parties´ rights and those of their canidates, 85% of the total available time established in a).

        d) The time established as the right of political parties and independent candidates will be distributed as follows: 70% will be distributed among the political parties according to the results of the last election for Legislators and 30% will be divided equally among candidates.

        Finally, this article mentions that political parties and candidates cannot hire or acquire by themselves or through third-parties time in radio or television.

        Access to air time for electoral campaigns is regulated in the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law, which contains a chapter on access to radio and television. It provides all the necessary guidelines to undertake what is established in article 41 of the Constitution. Furthermore, it establishes in depth information on the entities in charge of overseeing that the amount of time awarded to each candidate is done as was established in the Law.

        In addition, the Law in its article 159 clearly states that individuals and legal entities are prohibited from hiring propaganda in radio and television which is directed to influence the electoral preferences, either in favor or against a specific candidate.

        In addition, article 411 establishes that independent candidates have the right to air time for their electoral campaigns just as if they were a newly registered party.

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Art. 159-186 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.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

        According to the experts that were interviewed to answer this question, air time in radio and television during the period considered as the electoral campaign (3 months prior to the elections) is distributed in a transparent way. In addition, the use of air time is monitored and regulated by the National Federal Institute in order to guarantee that the coverage of the elections and the mentions that each candidate receives is as equitable as possible. However, the experts also mention that despite the strong regulating rules established to control air time during campaigns, political parties have found a way to obtain additional coverage.

        According to Alfredo Figueroa, former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute, “the 2007 constitutional reform and the 2008 legal reform led us to have a first experience in terms of administrating the state´s time, which is 48 minutes. To do so, the Institute developed an integral system that monitors 24 hours a day 95% of the channels (radio and TV). These are around 1,700 stations. According to the results obtained during the 2012 election, we proved that the system works well and it has allowed us to comply with what is established in the law. However, it can be said that during the period which is not considered as the Mexican state´s time, there is an illegal sale or a black market of political electoral publicity before the electoral campaign“.

        Justine Dupuy, who is an expert in transparency and accountability and who is also the Coordinator of an Official Publicity project, stated that “the use of media has changed a lot in the past years. Now it is much more controlled. The National Electoral Institute established a mechanism through which the Institute can monitor the use of air time to see if the radio and TV stations are complying with what is established in the law. The distribution is equitable based on a process of distribution that is transparent and clear. Despite this, there is evidence that political parties have learned new ways to go around the law and to appear in media through different mechanisms such as product placements (appearing in Telenovelas, daily talk shows). This is a new marketing strategy that is being implemented by parties so that candidates appear indirectly on television and that does not take place during the campaign but before it.

        Ernesto Núñez -who is an expert in Political Parties and who is the editor of a leading newspaper in Mexico´s supplement- mentioned that the use of communication mechanisms were reformed in 2007, after the 2006 election where President Felipe Calderon was elected and where there where parties spent extraordinary sums of resources on publicity, to include specific rules on how time would be distributed among parties and how the implementation of the law would be monitored. However, he mentioned that these laws only focused on the period that is considered as the campaigning period“.

        “During the 2012, Peña Nieto, who was the Governor of the State of Mexico, was able to position himself before the elections through an agreement with one of the two most important television stations in Mexico. The Guardian even published an article with invoices and products that the candidate had bought to appear constantly on television“.

        Despite this situation, Ernesto Nuñez mentioned “the model, the formula functioned well, which is the paradox. At the time, there were also numerous doubts that the IFE would be able to monitor the media, yet they were very successful. Even during precampaigns, air time was very controlled. However, the inequality had already happened before the election period“.

        If we look at the inform that was elaborated by the National Autonomous University of Mexico, during the campaign period, Peña Nieto, from the PRI, received 30% of the time dedicated to the candidates in the news in radio and television. Then the PAN, received 26.52% and the PRD also received 26%. As can be seen, the biggest parties in Mexico received almost the same coverage during the election period. However, before the campaigns began, the amount of air time dedicated to Peña Nieto´s government and their accomplishments was substantially higher.


        Peer Reviewer comment: Agree. A large student movement called #yosoy132 formed during the 2012 elections around allegations that the two main television corporations in Mexico – Televisa and TV Azteca – favored Peña-Nieto with hidden propaganda in the form of favorable coverage in news broadcasts and opinion shows during his governorship. Nevertheless, in its ruling on the matter, the Federal Electoral Institute decided against these allegations.

        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
        • Dr. Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013 August 27, 2014

        • Ernesto Núñez Editor of the Reforma´s Supplement Newspaper Reforma August 19, 2014

        • Justine Dupuy Researcher Fundar, Center for Analysis and Research August 7, 2014

        • Juicio de Inconformidad. Actor: Coalicion Moviemiento Progresista. Terceros: Coalicion Compromiso por Mexico. Autoridades Responsables: Consejo General del INE (Disagreement Judgement. Actor: Coalition Progressive Movement. Third Actor Involved: Coalition Commitment for Mexico. Responsible Authorities: INE´s General Council) Federal Electoral Tribunal 2012 http://www.ine.mx/documentos/proceso_2011-2012/documentos/SUP-JIN-359-2012.pdf

        • Monitoreo de Espacios Noticiosos en Radio y Televisión Campaña Electoral para Presidente de la República 2011-2012 (Monitoring News Spaces in Radio and Television for the Presidential Electoral Campaign) Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (National Autonomous University of Mexico) July 30, 2014

        • Peña Nieto, el candidato con más tiempo y mejor "valorado" en noticiarios (Peña Nieto, the candidate with the most time and the best valued one in the news) CNN Mexico July 30, 2012 http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/07/30/pena-nieto-el-candidato-con-mas-tiempo-y-mejor-valorado-en-noticiarios

        • Mexico media scandal: Televisa´s alleged collusion with Peña Nieto The Guardian June 2012 http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2012/jun/08/mexico-media-scandal-televisa-pena-nieto-claims

        • Vicente Díaz: El uso de recursos públicos en campaña electoral es un delito (Vicente Diaz: the use of public resources in electoral campaigns is a felony) La Patilla http://www.lapatilla.com/site/2012/07/03/vicente-diaz-el-uso-de-recursos-publicos-en-campana-electoral-es-un-delito/

        • La campaña electoral mexicana, la más 'cuestionable' de la historia (The Electoral Campaign in Mexico, the most questionable in History) Efe Mexico June 6, 2012 http://www.elmundo.es/america/2012/06/13/mexico/1339622595.html

        Reviewer's sources: -Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource -Resolución del Consejo General (IFE), Sesión Extraordinaria 16 de Agosto de 2012. http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/interiores/menuitem.110045b65b20f23517bed910d08600a0-id-70c394fed1839310VgnVCM1000000c68000aRCRD/

  • expand button!

    Contribution and Expenditure Restrictions

    More about category
    composite
    82
    • expand button!
      General Rules on Electoral Campaign Contributions
      More about category
      • expand button!
        9
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, cash contributions are banned.More about indicator

        The law does not prohibit political parties from receiving cash contributions; however, independent candidates cannot receive cash transfers.

        The Mexican Law does not prohibit political parties from obtaining cash contributions which would be used for the political parties´ operational expenditures and also for their campaigns. The law acknowledges that each political party will receive quotas from their affiliated members and that these can be provided in cash. In addition, it also mentions that political parties can receive cash donations from individual supporters for electoral campaigns.

        Article 56 of the General Political Parties Law establishes the type of additional funding that a party can obtain to finance its activities.

        “Private financing will have to comply with the following annual limits: a) In the case of contributions from affiliated members, 2% of public financing granted to all political parties to support their ordinary activities and primaries in year in question; b) In the case of candidate´s contributions and from supporters for elections, 10% of the last presidential electoral campaigns´expenditure ceiling. c) Each political party will freely determine the minimum and maximum amounts and timing of affiliated members´ ordinary and extraordinary contributions, as well as the voluntary personal contributions that candidates can make exclusively for their primaries and campaigns, and d) Supporters´ contributions have an annual individual limit of 0.5% of the last presidential campaign expenditure ceiling.“

        However, article 54 of the General Political Parties Law specifies that candidates and political parties cannot receive cash transfers from any entity from the federal, state and/or municipal public administration, religious institutions, autonomous institutions, among others.

        Furthermore, article 380, 394 and 400 of the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law establishes that independent candidates are responsible for rejecting cash, in kind contributions and precious gems from any individual or legal entity.

        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
        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Articles 380, 394 and 400 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.pdf

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Article 54, 56 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

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

        Anonymous contributions for political campaigns are banned in Mexico. According to the General Political Parties Law, article 55, “political parties cannot receive contributions from a non-identified person“.

        In addition, the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law in its article 402 mentions that Independent Candidates cannot receive contributions from a non-identified person.

        Finally, article 56 of the General Political Parties Law establishes that for informing purposes, the political party must maintain a relation of all the contributions it has received and the name of the person that awarded it. In addition, this article also establishes that when it comes to in-kind donations, a contract must be established between the Political Party and the contributor, which will stipulate the unit value of the donation, the total value of the donation and if applicable, the number of units that were donated.

        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
        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Art. 402 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.pdf

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Article 55 May 23, 2014

      • expand button!
        11
        Score
        YES
        In law, in-kind donations to political parties and individual candidates must be reported.More about indicator

        The electoral laws require political parties and independent candidates to report all resources received and spent during their campaigns.

        According to article 25 of the Political Parties General Law, “all political parties must prepare and submit reports which contain the origin and use of resources referred to in the Law“. Article 53 and 56 state that a political parties income is composed of public financial resources plus:

        a) Contributions and donations from affiliated members b) Contributions and donations (cash and in-kind) from supporters c) Self-financing, and d) Financing from financial returns, funds and trusts.

        In addition, article 30 provides a list of what is considered as political parties´ public information and it includes the reports that political parties are required to deliver in terms of the provisions of this Law, the financial statement of the political party, the inventory of real estate it owns, leased or have in its possession under any legal form, and Annexes which form integral part of the above documents, the relationship between donors and the amounts contributed by each one.

        Article 56 of the General Political Parties Law establishes that for informing purposes, the political party must maintain a relation of all the contributions it has received and the name of the person that awarded it. In addition, this article also establishes that when it comes to in-kind donations, a contract must be established between the Political Party and the contributor, which will stipulate the unit value of the donation, the total value of the donation and if applicable, the number of units that were donated.

        According to article 445 of the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law, it is considered a violation of the law when candidates or pre-candidates fail to inform on the in cash or in-kind resources received for their campaigns or pre-campaigns.

        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
        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Article 25, 30, 53 May 23, 2014

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Article 445 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

      • expand button!
        12
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, loans to political parties and individual candidates must be reported.More about indicator

        Political parties in Mexico cannot acquire debt to finance their campaigns. The Constitution, the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law and the Political Parties General Law establish that political parties will finance their campaigns mainly with public resources, and that they also obtain private funding. Private Funding can only come from the following categories:

        a) Funding from affiliated members (Quotas, donations) b) Funding from Supporters c) Self-financing (Fundraising events) d) Funding from financial gains, funds and trusts

        However, the law does recognise that political parties may have liabilities and articles 60, 61 and 78 establish that political parties´ annual reports must include a consolidated balance of their liabilities.

        Independent candidates are not restricted from taking loans, nor do they need to report on them (§§357-439 General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law).

        The law is silent on the incurring of loans by party candidates. However, this is a very minor issue because party candidates can only use loans to provide a contribution to the party (which is prone to a limit; §56 Political Parties General Law). Political parties acquire and manage the major brunt of financial resources used in election campaigns (§41 Constitution) and they are required to report any loans they incur to the oversight authority (§§60, 61, 78 Political Parties General Law).

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Art. 393, 398, 407 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Articles 53, 60, 61, 78 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

    • 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 Political Parties General Law establishes that political parties are allowed to obtain in addition to public funding, private funding. However, it establishes that private funding has to adjust to the following limits:

        a) For the case of affiliated members´ contributions, 2% of public funds granted to all political parties to support their ordinary activities and precampaigns in the year in question; b) For the case of candidates´ contributions and their supporters during elections, 10% of the amount fixed as spending cap for the previous presidential election c) Each political party will freely determine the minimum and maximum amount of their affiliated members´ ordinary and extraordinary quotas and their periodicity, as well as candidates´ and precandidates´ voluntary contributions for their campaigns; d) Supporters´ contributions will have an individual annual limit of .5% of the spending cap established for the last presidencial election.

        For Independent Candidates, the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law in its article 399 establishes that public financing is constituted by the Independent Candidates´ and its supporters´ contributions and that it cannot exceed 10% of the elections spending cap.

        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
        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Articles 41, 53, 56 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Article 399 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

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

        With the recently approved electoral reforms, political parties and candidates are prohibited from receiving contributions from corporations.

        According to the Political Parties General Law in its article 54:

        “They may not make in cash or in-kind contributions or donations to political parties or candidates, or precandidates for a position in office, directly or through another person under any circumstances

        f) Legal entities“

        In addition, the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law, article 380, also establishes that Independent Candidates cannot receive cash or in-kind contributions from individuals or legal entities.

        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
        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Articles 380, May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.pdf

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Article 54 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

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

        The Political Parties´ General Law, article 25, establishes that political parties have the obligation to reject all class of economic, political foreign support. It also states that they cannot accept contributions or donations in cash or in-kind and under no circumstance from foreign political parties, individuals or legal entities, as well as from international organisms or from people that live or work abroad.

        In addition, the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law, article 380 also prohibits all independent candidates from receiving foreign support.

        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
        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Article 380 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

        • Ley General de Partidos Politicos (Political Parties General Law) May 23, 2014 Article 25 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

      • expand button!
        16
        Score
        YES
        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

        According to Mexico´s electoral laws, political parties and candidates cannot receive contributions or donations from any legal entity, which would apply for foundations, think tanks, organizations. In addition, the law also establishes that candidates may not receive donations or contributions from unions. Article 3 of the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law establishes that political parties are entities of public interest and their objective is to promote the participation of the people in democratic life. The article also mentions that it is the citizen´s right to become part of a party and to become a member in a free and individual mamner. For this reason, the law prohibits the intervention of CSOs, unions, national and international organizations, and any other corporate form. Article 12 also establishes that in the constitution of a political parties unions and any other organization cannot be involved expect those that have the purpose of constituting a party.

        According to the Political Parties General Law in its article 54:

        “They may not make in cash or in-kind contributions or donations to political parties or candidates, or precandidates for a position in office, directly or through another person under any circumstances: f) Legal entities“

        In addition, the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law, article 380, also establishes that Independent Candidates cannot receive cash or in-kind contributions from individuals or legal entities. Article 401, establishes that independent candidates cannot receive donations and contributions from associations, unions and corporate organizations.

        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
        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Articles 31, 408 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.pdf

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Articles 401 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

      • 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

        In Mexico, campaign spending for political parties and for independent candidates has a limit. According to the Constitution of Mexico, article 41, “the law will set the limit on expenditures for the internal candidate selection process and for electoral campaigns“. The Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law, article 229, establishes that the limit on precampaign spending will be equal to 20% of the amount established for the previous elections, depending on the type of election that is taking place.

        Article 243, establishes:

        “ 1. Expenses undertaken by political parties, coalitions and candidates in electoral publicity and campaign activities, may not exceed the limit decided by the General Council for each election. ... 4. The General Council in determining the limit on campaign spending, will apply the following rules: a) For the election of President of the United Mexican States: I. The upper limit for campaign spending will be equal to 20% percent of public funding established for all parties for the year of the presidential election, and b) For the election of legislators and senators: I. The upper limit on campaign spending for the election of Legislators by relative majority shall be the amount obtained by dividing the spending limit set for the presidential campaign divided by 300*. For the year in which only the Lower House is is renewed (every 3 years), the amount referred to in this fraction will be updated with the Federal District´s minimum daily wage growth rate, and II. In the election of senators by the principle of relative majority, the maximum limit for campaign spending will be the amount obtained by multiplying the total limit established for the Legislative campaign spending by the number of districts that comprise the entity in question. In any case, the number of districts cannot be more than 20.“

        • In Mexico, the Lower House is composed in total of 500 Legislators. Out of these, 300 are chosen on the basis of relative majority. The other 200 are chosen on the basis of proportional representation.

        Regarding Independent Candidates, these also have a limit to the amount of spending they can undertake during electoral campaigns. According to the Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law, article 374: “ 2. The General Council will determine the campaign spending limit which will be equivalent to 10% of that established for the last campaign depending on the type of election“.

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Article 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Articles 229, 243, 374 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.pdf

        • Acuerdo del Consejo General del Instituto Federal Electoral por el que se determina el tope máximo de gastos de Campaña para la Elección de Presidente de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos para el proceso electoral Federal 2011-2012 (Agreement of the General Council in which campaign expenditures limits are defined for the Presidential Campaign for the 2011- 2012 electoral process) National Electoral Institute http://www.ine.mx/docs/IFE-v2/DS/DS-CG/DS-SesionesCG/CG-acuerdos/2011/diciembre/CGex201112-16/CGe161211ap2.pdf

        • Acuerdo del Consejo General del Instituto Federal Electoral por el que se determina el tope máximo de gastos de Campaña para la Elección de Diputados y Senadores por el principio de mayoría relativa para el proceso electoral Federal 2011-2012 (Agreement of the General Council in which campaign expenditures limits are defined for the Campaigns of Legislators and Senators for the 2011- 2012 electoral process) National Electoral Institute http://www.ine.mx/docs/IFE-v2/DS/DS-CG/DS-SesionesCG/CG-acuerdos/2011/diciembre/CGex201112-16/CGe161211ap3.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

        At the beginning of 2014, Legislators approved a Political and Electoral Constitutional Reform which, among other things, had the purpose of strengthening transparency and accountability mechanisms. For this reasons, the reform touched upon many aspects related to political parties´ finances and to do so, it provided the oversight institution with additional faculties that would allow it to oversee their finances. In addition, parallel to this political electoral reform, Article 6 of the Constitution on Transparency was also reformed, making political parties obligated subjects and for this reason, are now obliged to operate under the principle of maximum publicity. These two reforms are very important because they are national reforms which also have direct effects on subnational electoral processes. Now the legislation becomes national and it regulated federal and subnational electoral process, including everything related to political parties.

        With the reform the Federal Electoral Institute, was transformed into a National Electoral Institute, making it the maximum authority on electoral processes. Before, the Institute was only in charge of the Federal election process, while now it also has the attribution to organize local elections and monitor them through local operating bodies. These recently approved modifications to the electoral legal framework have profound effects when it comes to political parties finances because now, resource oversight will be undertaken at the national level.

        According to Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez, Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013, “a central faculty of the new National Electoral Institute (INE) and perhaps one of the most relevant aspects of overseeing has to do with a national oversight process. The INE will be the authority responsible of political parties. A system which would allow the INE to monitor at the local level is currently being developed. In addition, attributions have been developed so that the oversight process can place ex-ante, so that before the electoral process concludes, it will be possible to have information on campaign expenditures. These are national attributions now“.

        According to Fernando Agiss, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at IFE, “the constitutional reform intends to homogenize the oversight process at the federal and subnational level. Apparently, there was an idea that there was a difference in the way that oversight took place at the federal and the local level regarding campaign resources and political parties´ finances. It was believed that local institutes were not sufficiently robust to oversee expenditures. For this reason, the reforms seeks to provide more faculties to the Institute so that it can oversee every campaign“.

        It is important to mention that although the INE is the authority in charge of overseeing political parties´ finances, these will be done through the local public organisms, which are a type of local operating arm of the institute. The selection of these new local organisms is also regulated through the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law. Jorge Romero, an expert on transparency and accountability, mentioned that the local process will be undertaken at that level; however, the new local organisms will be integrated by members that will be appointed by the INE.

        Finally, all these reforms are very new and that they will be put to test in the upcoming local elections.

        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
        • Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at IFE Agiss and Associates August 12, 2014

        • Dr. Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013 August 27, 2014

        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Article 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Article May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Articles 50, 51 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

        • Reforma Politico Electoral para Transformar a Mexico (Political Electoral Reform to Transform Mexico) Fundación Colosio August 2014 http://fundacioncolosio.mx/content/media/events/21/CUADERNILLO%20POLITICO-ELECTORAL.pdf

      • expand button!
        19
        Score
        --
        Open Question: What are the predominant sources of funding for electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        The majority of the resources used by political parties to finance their precampaigns and campaigning activities come from the public administration. In Mexico, the Constitution in its article 41 clearly states that the State will guarantee that political parties have the necessary resources to undertake their ordinary and campaigning activities, that the law will establish a formula to distribute resources equitably among parties and that it must ensure that public funding prevail over private funding.

        In addition, the Political Parties General Law states that political parties can obtain private funding which comes from: Financing from affiliated members, Financing from supporters, Self-financing (sale of properties) and Financing from financial returns, trusts and funds.

        In line with these guidelines, when analysing all the political parties that participated in the 2012 election´s annual reports, we can observe that the vast amount of resources come from public funding. During the 2012 election, in general, close to 90% or over 90% of the total amount of resources used to fund the political parties´ campaigns were public.

        Regarding private funding, depending on the party, the majority of funds come from affiliated members or from supporters. It´s important to recall that the law establishes very clear limits to the amount of resources that affiliated members or supporters can contribute and donate to the party for campaigns, and this is the same situation for candidates.

        During 2012, if we look at the PRI´s annual report, the majority of private fund for their campaign came from supporters and the majority was provided as an in-kind support. When looking at the PAN´s annual report, they received greater in-kind support from their affiliated members.

        Political Parties in Mexico can also obtain resources by selling properties or by organizing fundraising events. In addition, they also have trusts; however, the amount of resources obtained through financial revenue is very small in comparison to what they are receiving from any other sources: this is less than 1% of the total amount of resources used for the campaign.

        The electoral law in Mexico has established a formula which guarantees that every campaign -political parties´candidates and independent candidates´- are primarily funded through public resources. For this reason, the law has set a limit to the amount of resources that candidates can invest in their campaigns and also the amount of private funding used to finance campaigns. When it comes to independent candidates, these must acquire the support of citizens in order to be enroled as an independent candidate. The amount of resources used to obtain that support is also regulated and it has a limit. The Political Parties General Law establishes that political parties are allowed to obtain in addition to public funding, private funding. However, it establishes that private funding has to adjust to the following limits:

        a) For the case of affiliated members´ contributions, 2% of public funds granted to all political parties to support their ordinary activities and precampaigns in the year in question; b) For the case of candidates´ contributions and their supporters during elections, 10% of the amount fixed as spending cap for the previous presidential election c) Each political party will freely determine the minimum and maximum amount of their affiliated members´ ordinary and extraordinary quotas and their periodicity, as well as candidates´ and precandidates´ voluntary contributions for their campaigns; d) Supporters´ contributions will have an individual annual limit of .5% of the spending cap established for the last presidencial election.

        For Independent Candidates, the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law in its article 399 establishes that public financing is constituted by the Independent Candidates´ and its supporters´ contributions and that it can not exceed 10% of the elections spending cap.


        Peer Reviewer comment: Agree. One should note, however, that these are the formal rules regulating the predominant sources of funding for electoral campaigns. One major problem that the INE encounters in its monitoring of political finance is that it cannot track cash transactions that may occur on a frequent basis given the substantial nature of Mexico's informal economy. For this reason former IFE Councelor Benito Nacif states that one major problem with Mexican finance regulation is that "we know that a lot of things are happening in the darkness [/under the radar] and that it are these things that really matter. But the tools to effectively audit these aspects [of political finance] do not exist. What we can really perceive is only a tip of the iceberg."

        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
        • Ismael Estrada Professor on Electoral Rights University of the State of Mexico August 18, 2014

        • Diego de la Mora Budgets and Public Policy Area Coordinator Fundar, Center for Analysis and Research AC August 7, 2014

        • El Costo de las Elecciones Presidenciales 2012 (The Cost of the 2012 Presidential Elections) Mexico Evalúa 2013 http://www.scribd.com/doc/124499894/Version-final-de-Costo-electoral

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Acción Nacional (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the National Action Party´s Resources) Partido Accion Nacional (PAN) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPAN.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Revolucionario Institucional (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the Institutional Revolutionary Party´s Resources) Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPRI.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido de la Revolución Democratica (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the Democratic Revolution´s Party Resources) Partido 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPRD.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido del Trabajo (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the Labour Party´s Resources) Partido del Trabajo (PT) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPT.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Verde Ecologista de Mexico (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of Mexico´s Green Ecologist Party) Partido Verde Ecologista de Mexico (PVEM) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPVEM.pdf

        Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Movimiento Ciudadano (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the Citizen´s Movement Party´s Resources) Partido Movimiento Ciudadano 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAMC.PDF

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Nueva Alianza (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of New Alliance Party´s Resources) Partido Nueva Alianza 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IANUAL.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource

        Interview Benito Nacif (July 5, 2012). Electoral Councilor IFE.

      • 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

        During the 2012 election, there were numerous cases where candidates campaigns exceeded the campaign spending limit that was established by the National Electoral Institute. This situation applies for the Presidential election and also for the Legislative.

        Specifically in the Presidential election, there were a couple of cases where campaign expenditure limits were not respected. In one of them, the National Electoral Institute found the party guilty of going over the limit established by the National Electoral Institute. However, in the other case, there were numerous reports, suspicions, even evidence, yet the resolution of this case is still pending in the Electoral Tribunal.

        Namely, the Democratic Revolution Party was found guilty of using more resources than what the National Electoral Institute´s General Council had established. The INE imposed a sanction of 182 million pesos, which is approximately 14 million USD. But this was the only case where a sanction had been established to a party for exceeding the limit established.

        According to Fernando Agiss, who was the Executive Director of Prerrogatives and Political Parties and who is an expert in the Electoral System in Mexico, oversight processes in Mexico are two pronged. On one side, you have the accountability process which is done before the authority and this is through the submission of the income-expenditures report. The other face comes from the complaint of misuse of funds or exceeding the limit which comes from suspicion or from evidence. In the case of the candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, his party was found guilty of going over the limit established by the INE from the information presented by his party. The Oversight Unit analysed all the information that was presented and determined that they had spent more than what was established and the party was imposed a fine.

        In the case of the Revolutionary Institutional Party, during the 2012 elections there were numerous articles and reports that stated that the PRI had spent more than was established as the campaign spending limit. This case was investigated because the opposition parties presented a complaint to the National Election Institute in which they included evidence related to the number of billboards the party had hired, events undertaken, they even had evidence that the PRI was distributing prepaid cards for Soriana - a national supermarket chain - to potential voters. However, the IFE did not find that the party had exceeded the limit. This case was then taken to the Electoral Tribunal and the case is still under scrutiny.

        According to Ernesto Nuñez, the Editor of a leading newspaper´s supplement, the PRI´s financing model was very clever because they were able to go around the Law. They were successful in providing more resources for Peña Nieto; for each peso that was destined for the Senators´ campaigns, a peso went to the Presidential campaign. For this reason, when it was time to report, the party reported these expenditures as part of the Campaigns for Congress“. The INE did not find the violation and the opposition decided to take it to the Tribunal.

        In addition, the opposition created a commission in the Lower House to investigate the PRI´s 2012 Presidential Campaign expenditures to try to determine how much money was actually spent and what was the origin of the resources used to finance it.

        When analyzing the Legislators´ campaigns, a great percentage of these also violated the campaign expenditure limit. According to a report released by the National Electoral Institute, almost 50% of the total amount of the PRI´s candidates for the Lower House were found guilty of spending more than what was established and for this reason, the party was fined.

        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
        • Ernesto Núñez Editor of the Reforma´s Supplement Newspaper Reforma August 19, 2014

        • Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate and former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE Agiss and Associates SC August 12, 2014

        • Para entender la fiscalización de gastos de campaña 2012 (To understand the 2012 campaign expenditure oversight process) Javier Aparicio Animal Politico July 2, 2013 http://www.animalpolitico.com/blogueros-covarianzas/2013/07/02/para-entender-la-fiscalizacion-de-gastos-de-campana-2012/#axzz3ArzipYH5

        • El 49% de los diputados del PRI violó el tope de gastos de campaña en 2012 (49% of the PRI´s Legislators violated the campaign expenditure limit in the 2012 campaign) Mauricio Torres CNN Mexico August 1, 2013 http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2013/08/01/el-49-de-los-diputados-del-pri-violo-el-tope-de-gastos-de-campana-en-2012

        • Rebasó AMLO topes de campaña por más de 60 mdp: IFE (AMLO went over the campaign expenditure limit in over 60 million pesos: IFE -now INE) Newspaper Excelsior January 29, 2013 http://www.excelsior.com.mx/2013/01/29/nacional/881478

        • Según el IFE, AMLO fue el único candidato que utilizó más dinero del permitido (According to the IFE, AMLO was the only candidate that used more resources than those allowed) Alonso Urrutia Newspaper La Jornada January 29, 2013 http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/01/29/politica/013n1pol

        • Izquierda estima que el PRI gastó 6 veces el tope de campaña (Left estimates that the PRI spent 6 times the campaign expenditure limit) Oscar Balderas ADN Político July 8, 2012 http://www.adnpolitico.com/2012/2012/07/08/la-eleccion-a-tribunal-la-izquierda-acusa-al-ife-de-omiso

        • La base del juicio de inconformidad de López Obrador (The basis of Lopez Obrador´s inconformity judgement) Tania L. Montalvo CNN Mexico July 13, 2012 http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/07/13/rebase-de-tope-de-gasto-de-campana

        • AMLO y PAN: Peña ya rebasó el tope de gastos de campaña (AMLO and PAN: Peña is already over the campaign expenditure limit) Miguel Angel Vargas ADN Politico April 18, 2012 http://www.adnpolitico.com/2012/2012/04/18/pena-ha-gastado-ya-150-mdp-en-publicidad-exterior-monreal

        • Gastó el PRI más de $4 mil 500 millones en la campaña de Peña Nieto en 2012 (PRI spent over 4,500 million pesos in Peña Nieto´s 2012 Campaign) Roberto Garduño y Enrique Mendez La Jornada March 12, 2014 http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2014/03/12/politica/008n1pol

  • expand button!

    Reporting and Public Disclosure

    More about category
    composite
    65
    • expand button!
      Reporting Requirements to the Oversight Entity
      More about category
      • expand button!
        21
        Score
        YES
        In law, political parties and individual candidates report itemized contributions and expenditures both during and outside electoral campaign periods.More about indicator

        The Electoral Law establishes that Political Parties must report Quarterly and Annually to inform on their ordinary expenditures and regarding precampaigns and campaigns, and the law establishes specific timelines to when information has to be provided.

        According to the Political Parties´ General Law, article 78, political parties must present their quarterly reports and those related to their ordinary expenditures according to the following guidelines:

        “ a) Quarterly Reports I. These will be presented 30 days after the end of the Quarter. II. The inform will report the obtained and expected result of the income and expenditures undertaken during the period. III. During federal election year this obligation will be suspended.

        b) Ordinary Annual Expenditure Reports I. These will be presented no later than 60 days after the last day of December of the established fiscal year. II. Ordinary expenditure´s report will include total income and ordinary expenditures undertaken by the political party during the fiscal year; III. With the annual report, parties will have to present a consolidated report of their assets, which they will have to include assets, liabilities, and their properties IV. These reports must be signed and authorised by the external auditor assigned by each political party.“

        When it comes to precampaigns and campaigns reports, article 79 establishes that political parties must present informs according to the following rules:

        1. Precampaign reports I. These must be presented for each one of the precandidates, specifying the origin and amount of resources obtained as well as the expenditures undertaken. III. The reports must be presented within the next 10 days after the conclusion of precampaigns.

        b) Campaign Reports: I. These must be presented by the political parties for each one of the election campaigns, specifying that the expenditures that the party and the candidate undertook III. Political Parties must present income and expenditures reports for periods of 30 days starting from the first day of the campaign. These must be submitted to the Technical Unit 3 days after the end of the period“.

        In addition, article 394 of the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law states that Independent Candidates must present reports in the same terms as political parties.

        The General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law and the Political Parties´ General Law do not specify if parties´reports have to provide itemized information. However, the law establishes that annual reports must be signed by an auditor. In addition, the National Electoral´s Institute Oversight Unit´s Rules article 30 states that the Oversight Unit can order the verification of procedures related to the annual and quarterly reports and it can order an itimized report or it can require information from the denounced.

        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

        Ley General de Partidos Politicos Article 78, 79 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

        Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Art. 394 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

        National Electoral´s Institute Oversight Unit´s Rules, article 30 http://norma.ine.mx/documents/27912/276880/2011_14ReglamentoPMFiscalizacion.pdf/7015d202-9688-4afa-876f-8d430e8b5b1a

      • expand button!
        22
        Score
        YES
        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 Electoral Law establishes that political parties must issue reports every 30 days starting from the first day of the campaign.

        According to the Political Parties´ General Law, article 79 political parties must present informs according to the following rules:

        1. Precampaign reports I. These must be presented for each one of the precandidates, specifying the origin and amount of resources obtained as well as the expenditures undertaken. III. The reports must be presented within the next 10 days after the conclusion of precampaigns.

        b) Campaign Reports: I. These must be presented by the political parties for each one of the election campaigns, specifying that the expenditures that the party and the candidate undertook III. Political Parties must present income and expenditures reports for periods of 30 days starting from the first day of the campaign. These must be submitted to the Technical Unit 3 days after the end of the period“.

        In addition, article 394 of the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law states that Independent Candidates must present reports in the same terms as political parties.

        It´s important to mention that the mandate of reporting on a monthly basis is one of the additions of the recently approved political reform. Before the reform, political parties would provide the oversight authority with a preliminary finance report before the elections, and a report once the elections had passed. According to the previous legislation (COFIPE), monthly reporting during the campaign was not required.

        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

        Ley General de Partidos Politicos May 23, 2014 Article 79 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

        Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Art. 394 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

        CO?DIGO FEDERAL DE INSTITUCIONES Y PROCEDIMIENTOS ELECTORALES (COFIPE) Federal Code of Electoral Institutions and Proceedings 14 January 2008 §83 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/COFIPEpromocionvoto/

      • expand button!
        23
        Score
        YES
        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 Electoral Law establishes that Political Parties must report Quarterly and Annually to inform on their ordinary expenditures.

        According to the Political Parties´ General Law, article 78, political parties must present quarterly reports and those related to their ordinary expenditures according to the following guidelines:

        “ a) Quarterly Reports I. These will be presented 30 days after the end of the Quarter. II. The inform will report the obtained and expected result of the income and expenditures undertaken during the period. III. During federal election year this obligation will be suspended.

        b) Ordinary Annual Expenditure Reports I. These will be presented no later than 60 days after the last day of December of the established fiscal year. II. Ordinary expenditure´s report will include total income and ordinary expenditures undertaken by the political party during the fiscal year; III. With the annual report, parties will have to present a consolidated report of their assets, which they will have to include assets, liabilities, and their properties IV. These reports must be signed and authorised by the external auditor assigned by each political party.“

        This question does not fully apply for Independent Candidates because these can only undertake political activities during the electoral process. Article 368 of the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law states that those citizens that would like to run for President, Legislative or for the Senate should notify the National Electoral Institute once the open call has been published. Once the independent candidate receive the title of aspirant, they can begin working towards obtaining the support from citizens. Article 369 establishes that IC wishing to run for President will have 120 days to obtain the necessary requirements to become a Candidate. Those running for the Senate will have 90 days and those running for the Legislative will have 60 days. During this period, candidates can hold assemblies, marches and any other relevant activity necessary to obtain the support from citizens. Article 372 establishes that candidates cannot undertake precampaign activities and they cannot hire spaces in radio and television during this time either. Article 374 establishes that every action oriented towards obtaining citizen support will be financed will private resources. Article 377 states that the General Council will determine the requirements for the reports that Independent Candidates must include in their income/expenditures reports regarding their obtaining citizen support activities.

        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

        Ley General de Partidos Politicos Article 78 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

        Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Art. 368, 369, 372, 377 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

      • expand button!
        24
        Score
        25
        In practice, to what extent do political parties and individual candidates report itemized financial information monthly?More about indicator

        During the 2012 federal elections, political parties were not obliged to report on a monthly basis. Political parties provided information annually (for ordinary expenditures) and during campaigns in post-election reports that were submitted to the then Federal Electoral Institute (now the National Electoral Institute) up to 90 days after elections. Itemized and standarized information was included in the annual 2012 financial reports submitted by political parties to the National Electoral Institute. During the 2012 federal elections, political parties were required to hand in a preliminary campaign finance report between May 30 and June 15, 2012. All parties handed in these reports on June 15, 2012, with the exception of a single party that presented all of its reports one day late. The preliminary campaign reports contained financial information that allowed the financial oversight unit (UFRPP) to begin its review process and compare the evidence found during the inspection visits to the expenses reported by the parties. In addition, the UFRPP could start requesting information from the SAT (National Tax Agency), CNByV (National Banking Committee) and third parties that the political parties had financial dealings with. Nevertheless, the preliminary nature of these reports lead to a situation in which parties were rather careless in their financial reporting as they would only be fined for errors and omissions in the final version of the finance reports. Indeed, as is clear from the preliminary report submitted by PAN, parties only gave general information on the financial activities of their candidates.

        Fernando Agiss, who is an expert in politics and was Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE, believes that “there is a before and an after. The new legislation establishes an online process through which political parties will have to report their income and expenditures daily. This will allow the National Electoral Institute to have timely information. However, before financial information was handed in a posteriori, when the campaign had finished, even 90 days after“.

        Jorge Romero, who is an expert on transparency and accountability issues in Mexico, stated that “until now, political parties have become obligated subjects due to the transparency reform. With this new reform, every organization, institution that receives resources from the government must report their use. This is new, we still need to see how it will be implemented.“

        The 2012 election period took place as follows: Precampaigns: December 18, 2011- February 15, 2012; Campaigns: March 30, 2012 - June 27, 2012; and Elections: July 1, 2012. In summary, a 90 day campaign period was covered by a sole post election report, provided up to 90 days after the election.

        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

        Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE Agiss and Associates August 12, 2014

        Jorge Romero Leon International Consultant on transparency, accountability and public policy August 22, 2013

        Informe Preliminar sobre el origen, monto y destino de los Recursos para las Campañas Electorales del Partido Acción Nacional (Preliminary Report on the Origin, Amount and Use of Resources received for the Electoral Campaign National Action Party (PAN)) 2012 http://ife.org.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/UFInformesPreliminaresCampaniaIPC/

        National Electoral Institute 2012 Financial Report example: Partido Accion Nacional, Anual Report 2012. http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPAN.pdf

        Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Pg. 30. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource

      • expand button!
        25
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent do financial reports by political parties and individual candidates include all types of contributions?More about indicator

        According to Fernando Agiss, former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE, the reports that are handed in by politcal parties are disaggerated to a certain extent but what is important to highlight is that the electoral authority has the capacity to go in depth into each aspect contained in the reports. Reports are elaborated based on the requirements established in the law and using the formats that the General Council develops. Once the reports is received the INE analyses each aspect and can solicit additional information from the party. Fernando Agiss also mentioned that each donor or contributor must be identifiable. The law established that cash transfers and anonymous contributions are not permitted. For this reason, contributions must be made through banking systema and a copy of their Electoral ID must be provided. This way, the electoral authority can verify directly the identity of the owner or they can also consult the voters lists.

        According to the interviewed expert, political parties must include in their reports the amount of contributions and donations, in-kind and in cash, obtained from the private sector. In addition, they are required to provide a list of donors and the amounts that these provided, and state if the contribution was in cash or in-kind. However, the information regarding the 2012 election, which would include the list of donors is still being reviewed by the National Electoral Institute. Thus, at the moment, it is not public. According to the General Council´s ruling of the Annual Report, the report included all the contributions. As a matter of fact, in the analyzed 2012 report, the Council stated that the party received more contributions than what was allowed in the law.

        Diego de la Mora, an expert in public budgets, stated that “political parties must present quarterly and annual reports. In addition, parties must present campaign reports but these must be handed in 90 days after the elections. Furthermore, campaign reports can become reserved when these are under revision by the Federal Electoral Tribunal“.

        The information that is currently available (August 2014) are preliminary campaign reports or reports which provide a copy of the parties´ submitted reform which includes information of resources received for the campaigns of each one of the candidates (Presidency, Legislative and Senate). These reports, provide in an aggregated way, the amount of resources received from the party for each of the candidates´ campaigns, how much they received from supporters, from affiliated members and these are divided in cash or in kind. However, the report is not linked donor information, it does not mention how many people contributed to each one of the categories included and with how much. The report is very aggregated and it is not provided in machine readable formats. The consolidated reports of the 2012 election are still not available.

        There are other reports where parties provide a list of affiliated members that contributed to the campaign, stating how much was their in-kind contribution and if they paid for any services for an event, etc. However, there are no reports related to cash contributions. It´s important to mention that, as can be seen from this second report, the official identification number of the person is not available because of the data protection law in Mexico.


        Peer Reviewer comment: Agree. The auditing proces is very rigorous. During the last elections, which were organized under the electoral rules adopted by the 2007/2008 reform, the auditing process consisted of four phases. In the first phase, the financial oversight unit (UFRPP) had 60 days to review the annual and pre-campaign reports and up to 120 days to review the campaign reports. In the second phase, any errors or omissions encountered in the auditing process were communicated back to the parties, which had 10 days to respond. This occured in face-to-face meetings where parties discussed with the UFRPP how to best improve their reports and adjoining documentation. In the third phase, the UFRPP examined the new information brought to the table by the parties. If errors or omissions were still present, parties had five days to remedy these problems. In the fourth phase, the UFRPP had 20 days to write a consolidated verdict and a subsequent three days to write a resolution project that proposed corresponding sanctions. These documents were presented to the IFE General Council for final acceptance or modification. This means that serious efforts were undertaken to ensure that political finance reports included an itemized list of all contributions indicating their type, the amount, and the donors' names and addresses.

        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

        Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE Agiss and Associates October 6, 2014

        Diego de la Mora Budgets and Public Policy Coordinator Fundar Centro de Analisis e Investigacion AC August 7, 2014

        Informe Preliminar sobre el origen, monto y destino de los Recursos para las Campañas Electorales del Partido Acción Nacional (Preliminary Report on the Origin, Amount and Use of Resources received for the Electoral Campaign National Action Party (PAN)) 2012 http://ife.org.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/UFInformesPreliminaresCampaniaIPC/

        Registro Centralizado Proveniente de la Militancia para la Campaña Federal (Central Registry obtained from Affiliated Members for the Federal Campaign) National Action Party (PAN) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IC-Fiscalizacion/IC-2012/ListadodeAportantes/01PANAportaMili.pdf

        Registro Centralizado Proveniente de los Simpatizantes para la Campaña Federal (Central Registry obtained from Supporters for the Federal Campaign) National Action Party (PAN) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IC-Fiscalizacion/IC-2012/ListadodeAportantes/02PANAportaSimpa.pdf

        Dictamen del Reporte Anual del Partido Acción Nacional del Consejo General del Instituto Nacional Electoral (Ruling of the National Action Party´s Annual Report by the National Electoral Institute´s General Council) Instituto Nacional Electoral 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-DictamenesCG/DictamenesCG-Docs/2012/05PANIA2012.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Pg. 22. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource

    • 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

        At the beginning of this year, Article 6 of Mexico´s Constitution, which establishes clear obligations in terms of transparency, was reformed. With this reform, political parties are now obligated to publish their information and they also have the obligation to provide it. Despite this, it was established that information related to finances would be reserved until the Oversight authority had finished reviewing it.

        This reform established that in order to exercise the right to access information all the information in hands of political parties or any other authority, the entity that receives and uses public funds will be considered public and can only be temporally reserved for public interest or national security.

        Article 28 of the Political Parties´General Law establishes that people can request information from parties directly.

        Article 24 establishes the procedure: i) every person can solicit information in writing or through the liaison unit using their electronic formats; ii) the request must contain certain information from the person that is requesting it (full name, email or address to receive notifications regarding the request, clearly state the type of information requested); iii) the request must not include an explanation on why the information is being requested; iv) if the request is not clear, the liaison unit will contact the person and if the request is not clarified within 15 working days then the request is discarded; v) if the information is available onlin, then the liaison unit will provide the link to the person. Article 25 states that the answer must be provided 15 working days after the request was received; if the information is not available then they must inform the requestee. If the information is classified, then the PP has 5 days to send the request to the Council so that they can confirm, modify or deny this.If certain aspects of the information are classified, the reponse must also be sent to the Council in which the party provides the original and the proposed public version so that the council can approve the response.

        Article 28 recognizes the possibility of extending the reponse period. The law also establishes that the requestee can contest the response received through the IFAI when the information is regarded as not available, or confidential when it is incomplete, among others. This request must also be submitted in writing. Once the organ received it, they have 10 working days to accept the contesting request or to discard it. If it is accepted then they will have 15 working days to provide a response to the requestee, which will include either the acceptance that the information is classified does not exists, among other or providing the information requested.

        The National Electoral Institute´s Bylaw on Transparency and Access to Information in its article 11 establishes the criteria to classify information: political parties reports that are being revised by the Technical Unit of the Oversight Commission until the Council has issued a resolution.

        Citizens cannot access information in a more timely way. With this modification, the Federal Transparency and Access to Information Law established in its article 11 that the reports presented by political parties to the National Electoral Institute (INE), as well as audits and inspections ordered by the Oversight Commission of the INE must be made public once the oversight process is concluded. In addition, it establishes that any citizen can ask the INE or the political parties directly for information.

        Furthermore, article 67 of the National Electoral Institute´s Bylaw on Transparency and Access to Information also states that political parties may choose to publish their partial income and expenditures reports, this also includes those for campaigns and precampaigns.

        Article 64 of the same bylaws states that politial parties must publish on their websites the following information: their basic documents; the party´s management powers; regulations, agreements and other general arrangements, approved by its governing bodies, which regulate their internal life, obligations and rights of its militants, choosing their leaders and the nomination of candidates for elected office; list of members, containing only the father's name, mother, given name, date of membership and residence; directory of national, state, municipal, the Federal District bodies; any person who receives income by the political party, irrespective of the function held within or outside the office; Contracts and agreements signed for the acquisition, leases, concessions and provision of goods and services; electoral platform; agreements undertaken with coalitions; open calls for electoral candidates; public financial amounts provided to the party for national, subnational and municipal organs; all the reports required by the INE and their financial situation; Revision,Reports and Audit result; Court rulings in which the party is part of the process and how they abide; Decisions made by its internal control bodies; Resolutions which guarantee the rights of its members and their full implementation; Names of their representatives at the INE; List of foundations, centers or institutes that receive financial support from the political party; Opinion and Rulings of the INE´s General Council regarding the reports submitted.

        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

        Constitución de los estados Unidos Mexicanos (Constitution of Mexico) Article 6 1917, relevant article reformed February 7, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        -Ley Federal de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública Gubernamental (Federal Transparency and Access to Information Law) Article 11 July 14, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/244_140714.pdf

        • Reglamento del Instituto Nacional Electoral en Materia de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública (National Electoral Institute´s Bylaw on Transparency and Access to Information) National Electoral Institute Articles 11, 64 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/276852/2014RegtoTransparencia.pdf/8dffabb3-fed9-421a-80f9-2b9ebff9d879

        Ley General de Partidos Politicos Articles 24, 28 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

      • expand button!
        27
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent can citizens easily access the financial information of all political parties and individual candidates?More about indicator

        Obtaining political parties´ financial information can be done through 3 different sources: through the National Electoral Institute´s website, through the political parties´ own websites and/or using the Federal Access to Information Law. However, the information that is obtained is not in machine readable formats (PDF´s and scanned copies of official documents), the information is not timely and the information provided throughout the fiscal year is scant. In addition, trying to access information regarding campaign expenditures obtaining information is even more difficult because if the INE imposed a sanction for any expenditure related with the campaign, the party can contest the resolution and then information would be reserved until the case is solved by the Federal Electoral Tribunal.

        When a citizen wants to access financial information from a political party, since 2013, the INE´s website provides monthly and quarterly reports on the amount of resources that are disbursed each month to political parties. In addition, each party, has started publishing tables with information on the amount of resources they have or would receive from the INE divided by resources for ordinary activities and resources for campaigns. In addition, due to the recent Constitutional Reform of Article 6 which establishes that political parties must also comply with all transparency requirements, they have also started to upload information regarding the amount of resources that they have obtained or will obtain through public funding. In addition, they included the amount of resources that are discounted from their resources in case they´ve been sanctioned for violating electoral laws. The main problem with this information is that it is not a report, and it is a table of information so that the citizen knows how many resources the party will receive each month throughout the fiscal year and these resources are not linked to any type of planned or executed expenditure.

        Information on expenditures is provided in political parties´ annual reports. However, these reports are published approximately 5 months after the resources were spent. As an example, at the moment the latest report available for each political party is that of 2012. According to the INE´s website,these reports were published in May 2013, which is the date when the section was last updated. In addition, the reports that are uploaded are scanned copies of the reports that were handed in by the parties, making it difficult for any citizen to systematise the information.

        The INE also publishes its consolidated report and its ruling on political parties´ annual reports. This document includes consolidated figures which include parties´ income and expenditures. In addition, it includes a list of donors that were confirmed by the INE. However, this document is focused on the ruling and it is not a full report on parties´ income and expenditures. It focused on the oversight process.

        Another way to access parties´ financial information is by using the Access to Information Law. According to Jacqueline Peschard and Fidel Astorga Ortiz, who wrote an essay on Transparency and Political Parties, mention that after the 2007 Constitutional Reform, the right to access to information was homogenised throughout the territory and this change included political parties. With this new reform, citizens can ask parties for very specific information which includes their financial statements. According to an evaluation that these two authors did in their study, they found that around 40% of the requests made to political parties are related to their financial statements. Furthermore, around 80% of the requests are answered positively. Yet, if political parties´ reports have not been approved by the General Council, then these are considered reserved.

        In addition, accessing information regarding political campaigns can become quite a task. According to Justine Dupuy, a transparency researcher, during the 2012 election, obtaining financial information was very difficult because it was the Federal Electoral Institute the entity in charge of publishing that information and these would receive the parties´ reports 90 days after campaigns had ended. In addition, if the INE sanctioned a party for violating any financial electoral law, the party had the right to contest and then financial information would be reserved until the Federal Electoral Tribunal solved the case.

        Fernando Agiss, a former Executive Director at INE, mentioned that financial information was handed in a posteriori when the campaign had already ended and the entity in charge of overseeing expenditures would do so at least 90 days after election day. This situation would give parties a good margin to modify their reports to their convenience. However, with the new changes to the Constitution, an online mechanism will be installed where real time information will be provided: political parties will need to upload information regarding their income and expenditures which will surely contribute to strengthening political parties´ transparency. In addition, the newly enacted Law establishes that campaign reports must be handed in 30 days after election day, which makes the information more timely.

        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
        • Mtro. Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former-Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at National Electoral Institute Agiss and Partners SC August 12, 2014

        • Justine Dupuy Researcher Fundar, Center for Analysis and Research August 7, 2014

        • Financiamiento Público y Sanciones del Consejo Ejecutivo Nacional 2014 (Public Funding and National Executive Committee 2014) Revolutionary Institutional Party http://pri.org.mx/transformandoamexico/Documentos/Transparencia/Fraccion9/Financiamiento_CEN.pdf

        • Montos de Financiamiento Público mensuales y descuentos. Informe Mensual 2014 (Monthly Amounts of Public Funding and Discounts. Monthly report 2014) National Action Party (Partido Acción Nacional) http://www.pan.org.mx/transparencia/

        • Dictamen Consolidado respecto de la revisión de los Informes Anuales de Ingresos y Gastos de los Partidos Políticos Nacionales correspondientes al ejercicio 2012 (Consolidated ruling on the revision of Political Parties´ Annual Informs for the year 2012) National Electoral Institute http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/interiores/DetalleInformesAnuales_Fiscalizacion-id-52d96479dc54c310VgnVCM1000000c68000aRCRD/

        • Financiamiento Público Designado y sanciones impuestas por el Instituto Nacional Electoral 2014 (Designated Public Financing and Sanctions imposed by the National Electoral Institute 2014) Revolutionary Democratic Party (Partido Revolucionario Democrático) http://transparencia.prd.org.mx/documentos/FINANCIAMIENTOPUBLICO2014.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos (Anual Report Partido Acción Nacional (National Action Party) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPAN.pdf

        • Los Partidos Políticos frente al Escrutinio. De la Fiscalización a la Transparencia (Political Parties under Scrutiny. From oversight to transparency) Jacqueline Peschard Mariscal and Fidel Astorga Ortiz Tribunal Federal Electoral del Poder Judicial (Federal Judicial Power´s Electoral Tribunal) 2012 http://www.trife.gob.mx/sites/default/files/31_partidos.pdf

      • expand button!
        28
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent is financial information published in a standardized format?More about indicator

        At the moment, the information from political parties that is available to the public is presented in a standarized format; however, the level of detailed presented is not comprehensive. Reports include broader areas of income and expenditure making it difficult to delve in certain aspects of parties´ finances.

        Fernando Agiss, former Executive Director of Prerrogatives and Political Parties at the National Electoral Institute mentions that there is a before and after the newly approved legislation. The new laws establish that political parties must report income and expenditures on a daily basis. However, this is something that is still to be implemented. At the moment we observe that political parties present their annual information in a standarized IA format.

        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

        Mtro. Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former-Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at National Electoral Institute Agiss and Partners SC August 12, 2014

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Acción Nacional (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the National Action Party´s Resources) Partido Accion Nacional (PAN) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPAN.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Revolucionario Institucional (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the Institutional Revolutionary Party´s Resources) Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPRI.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido de la Revolución Democratica (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the Democratic Revolution´s Party Resources) Partido 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPRD.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido del Trabajo (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the Labour Party´s Resources) Partido del Trabajo (PT) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPT.pdf

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Verde Ecologista de Mexico (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of Mexico´s Green Ecologist Party) Partido Verde Ecologista de Mexico (PVEM) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPVEM.pdf

        Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Movimiento Ciudadano (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of the Citizen´s Movement Party´s Resources) Partido Movimiento Ciudadano 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAMC.PDF

        • Informe Anual del Origen y Destino de los Recursos del Partido Nueva Alianza (Annual Report of the Origin and Use of New Alliance Party´s Resources) Partido Nueva Alianza 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IANUAL.pdf
      • 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

        In Mexico, journalists play a key role when disseminating information related to political parties financial resources. There are several leading newspapers that consistently publish information related to the cost of political parties, the cost of electoral campaigns (in the Federal and Local level); however, the vast majority of the articles are related to the coverage that newspapers and outlets do to press conferences or the meetings of the National Electoral Institute or information provided by the political parties. With this in mind, there is still room to include more journalists in the use of parties´ financial information to undertake more in-depth articles.

        If you look at the articles availble during the elections, they´re either focused on analyzing the amount of public resources used to finance the elections -which comes from official information provided by the INE of the Ministry of Finance- or they´re focused on covering information provided by other parties. The reason is that parties did not submit any information regarding their campaign costs - although they submitted a precampaign report, these were not available during the campaign period.

        According to Ernesto Nuñez, Editor of the Reforma´s Supplement and a specialised journalist on politics, “the financial information that is available, is used by journalists but not as much as they should. Journalists faced numerous problems to access additional information due to the former transparency laws that applied to political parties. Political parties´ transparency mechanisms were very complicated because access to information requests had to be done through the National Electoral Institute. This situation made it very unattractive because when the INE resolved that the information had to be made public, it was published in the website and we lost exclusivity. Now with the current modifications to Article 6 of the Constitution and to the newly adopted electoral laws, political parties will be under a stricter transparency regime“.

        Oscar Arredondo, a budgets expert, also voiced that journalists are using the information that political parties publish; however, this does not go beyond. “The use is very limited“. Justine Dupuy, who is a researcher and leads an Official Publicity Monitoring Project, mentioned that there is not a real debate around financial data.

        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
        • Ernesto Núñez Editor of the Reforma´s Supplement Newspaper Reforma August 19, 2014

        • Justine Dupuy Researcher Fundar, Center for Analysis and Research August 7, 2014

        • Oscar Arredondo Researcher Fundar, Center for Analysis and Research August 7, 2014

        • ¿Cuánto nos costarán los partidos este 2012? (How much will the 2012 elections cost us?) Sofia Yañez Red Política from the Newspaper El Universal March 4, 2012 http://www.redpolitica.mx/node/499

        • Oneroso financiamiento partidista (Expensive Party Financing) Jesus Cantu Proceso January 13, 2013 http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=330748

        • El 49% de los diputados del PRI violó el tope de gastos de campaña en 2012 (49% of the PRI´s Legislators violated the campaign expenditure limit in 2012) Mauricio Torres CNN Mexico http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2013/08/01/el-49-de-los-diputados-del-pri-violo-el-tope-de-gastos-de-campana-en-2012

        • Factor Clave (The Key Factor) Jesus Cantu July 31, 2012 Proceso http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=315679

        -Crece bolsa a partidos; será de 4 mil mdp (Parties´ resource bag grows: it will have 4 thousand million pesos) Carina Garcia January 15, 2014 El Universal http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/nacion-mexico/2014/crece-bolsa-a-partidos-sera-de-4-mil-mdp-979627.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

        According to the people interviewed and to the numerous articles, reports and investigations, during the 2012 federal elections there were numerous reports of violations and abuses of the electoral law, specifically related to political financing. All the parties that participated in the 2012 election, either in the presidential election or for the senate or for the legislative, were found guilty of going over the campaign spending limit established by the National Electoral Institution (before Federal Election Institute). In addition, there were other practices or abuses of the electoral law during the process.

        For the presidencial election, only the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD) was fined by the National Electoral Institute for going over the campaign spending limit. Fernando Agiss explained that this sanction came about from the revision of the parties inform. When the party submitted their report, the Oversight Unit found that the party had spent more than what was allowed and for this reason, received a fine. In addition, the other parties were also fined because their candidates for the Senate or for the Legislative also went over the campaign spending limit. In this case, it was the PRI´s coalition -Commitment for Mexico- that received the biggest fine. These were the cases where the INE fined the parties. However, there were other cases which were not sanctioned but which are an abuse of the financing political law because they question the need to establish campaign limit spendings if it will not be abided by parties.

        During the 2012 campaign, the PRI allegedly spent more than what had been established by the National Electoral Campaign in their presidential campaign. According to Ernesto Nuñez, an expert in politics and Editor of the Newspaper Reforma´s Supplement, the PRI was able to shift more resources for Peña Nieto´s campaign by using resources from the other candidate´s campaigns for the Senate of the Legislative. This means that for every peso used for a Legislative campaign, a peso went to Peña Nieto´s presidential campaign. For example, if there was an event for the all of the candidates, then the expenses would be divided among all the campaigns. This would also happen with propaganda or any other campaign events, activities, etc. The opposition asked the INE to sanction for this practice, but the Institute said it was allowed and this was contested before the Federal Electoral Tribunal, but the resolution is still pending.

        Another situation that has been highly contested was the use of prepaid cards from a financial company “Monex“. The PRI has stated that they used the Monex prepaid cards to pay for organizational matters, to pay local helpers. However, the coalition of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has stated that these were used to triangulate resources and that this way, the PRI could have more resources to invest in their campaign. This situation is still under investigation. The Lower House created a special commission to investigate it and issue a report which will be sent to the Federal Electoral Tribunal. The Monex case not only had the intention of buying votes but it was also a mechanism that was used to increase the campaign expenditure limit without it appearing in the books. It has never been made clear the actual purpose of using Monex but it had both effects

        Due to numerous irregularities in the PRI´s campaign, the Progressive Movement Coalition (formed by the PRD, PT and Convergencia) submitted a case before the Federal Electoral Tribunal to contest the elections. However, this case was dismissed.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. Many reports on the violation and/or abuse of political finance laws resulted from the political parties adopting political finance litigation as a campaign strategy. During the elections, for example, the IFE's political finance oversight unit received 63 complaints on matters related to political finance. These complaints were mostly lodged by other parties.

        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
        • Ernesto Núñez Editor of the Reforma´s Supplement Newspaper Reforma August 19, 2014

        • Oscar Arredondo Researcher, budgets and public policy expert Fundar, Center for Analysis and Research August 7, 2014

        • Fernando Agiss Associate and former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE Agiss and Associates August 12, 2014

        • Juicio de Inconformidad. Actor: Coalicion Movimiento Progresista. Terceros: Coalicion Compromiso por Mexico. Autoridades Responsables: Consejo General del INE (Disagreement Judgement. Actor: Coalition Progressive Movement. Third Actor Involved: Coalition Commitment for Mexico. Responsible Authorities: INE´s General Council) Federal Electoral Tribunal 2012 http://www.ine.mx/documentos/proceso_2011-2012/documentos/SUP-JIN-359-2012.pdf

        • El IFE avala multas a partidos por más de 341 mdp por los gastos de 2012 (The IFE backs fines to parties for more than 341 mdp for the 2012 expenditures) CNN Mexico July 15, 2013 http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2013/07/15/el-ife-avala-multas-a-partidos-por-mas-de-341-mdp-por-los-gastos-de-2012

        • Frena el PRI, otra vez, comisión para investigar el caso Monex Editorial Staff AN Aristegui Noticias November 7, 2012 http://aristeguinoticias.com/0711/mexico/frena-el-pri-otra-vez-comision-para-investigar-el-caso-monex/

        • Acusa el PRI a AMLO de usar a Morena para triangular sus gastos de campaña (PRI accuses AMLO of using Morena to triangulate resources for his campaign) La Jornada Junio 10, 2012 http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2012/06/10/politica/008n1pol

        • El Estado de México niega uso de sus cuentas para apoyar campaña de Peña Nieto (The State of Mexico denies using its accounts to support Peña Nieto´s Campaign) August 3, 2012 CNN Mexico http://blogs.cnnmexico.com/la-grilla/2012/08/03/el-estado-de-mexico-niega-uso-de-sus-cuentas-para-apoyar-campana-de-pena-nieto/

        • Los tiempos de Justicia en México. Justicia electoral. El caso Monex y la multa al PRD (Times of Justice in Mexico. Electoral Justice. The Monex case and the fine on the PRD) Mariana Garcia, Mexico Evalua Animal Politico http://www.mexicoevalua.org/los-tiempos-de-la-justicia-en-mexico

        • López Obrador denuncia que hubo lavado de dinero en campaña de Peña Nieto (Lopez Obrador denounces money laundering in Peña Nieto´s Campaign) Tania L. Montalvo CNN Mexico July 18, 2012 http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/07/18/lopez-obrador-dice-que-pena-nieto-se-beneficio-con-recursos-ilicitos

        • PRI admite reparto de 66 mdp en tarjetas para fines de "organización" (PRI admits distribution of 66mdp in cards for organization purposes) Tania L. Montalvo July 19, 2012 http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/07/19/el-pri-rechaza-acusacion-de-lavado-de-dinero-y-presenta-denuncia-en-la-pgr

        • Papeles, discos y parrillas, entre las pruebas para impugnar la elección (Papers, discs and grills, among the evidence to contest the election) Mauricio Torres CNN Mexico July 18, 2012 http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/07/18/papeles-discos-y-parrillas-entre-las-pruebas-para-imugnar-la-eleccion

        • El PRI denuncia "financiamiento ilícito" en la campaña de López Obrador (The PRI denounces illicit financing in Lopez Obrador´s Campaign) Belen Zapata July 23, 2012 CNN Mexico http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/07/23/el-pri-denuncia-financiamiento-ilicito-en-la-campana-de-lopez-obrador

        • Se decide el martes si se investiga el uso de recursos públicos en campañas (On Tuesday it will be decided if there will be an investigation on the use of public resources in campaigns) Enrique Méndez, Roberto Garduño y Raúl Llanos Newspaper La Jornada November 16, 2012 http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2012/11/16/politica/014n1pol

        • Acuerdo unánime de partidos para crear comisión especial Monex (Unanimous agreement among parties to create special commission Monex) Editorial Staff AN Aristegui Noticias November 14, 2012 http://aristeguinoticias.com/1411/mexico/acuerdo-unanime-de-partidos-para-crear-comision-especial-monex/

        • Exige PRI a PGR indagar presunto lavado de dinero (PRI demands the General Attorney´s Office to investigate supposed money laundering) Francisco Resendiz Newspaper El Universal July 19, 2012 http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/notas/859970.html

        Reviewer's sources: Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource

        Interview Benito Nacif (July 5, 2012). Electoral Councilor IFE.

      • 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

        According to the experts interviewed there were numerous newspaper articles that pointed to vote-buying during the 2012 campaign and election. The main actor involved in the vote-buying suspicion was the Institutional Revolutionary Party and specifically, for Enrique Peña Nieto´s presidential campaign.

        During the 2012 election, prepaid cards for the supermarket Soriana were distributed among people. Some of these cards, even had the PRI´s logo on them or a picture of Peña Nieto. In addition, there were also allegations that the PRI used other type of financial cards to distribute money to people to get there vote. Furthermore, other things were distributed such as a sack of cement, to animals (sheep, goats), to other regular propaganda like footballs.

        Diego de la Mora mentioned that the most notorious case during the 2012 elections was the Soriana and the Monexgate cases. Furthermore, he stated that the Monexgate took place before and after the elections and that during this time, newspapers, radio and television had a huge coverage on the story. Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador´s party, the Democratic Revolution Party, put together a case to contest the results of the election. However, the IFE dismissed the case. The Institution stated that prepaid cards were not necessarily linked to vote-buying.


        Peer Reviewer comment: Agree. The Monex and Soriana scandals formed two important news items during and after the 2012 elections.

        Molenaar (2012, pp. 30) states: "The Banco Monex (Monex Bank) scandal unfolded on June 25, 2012, when the PAN denounced the existence of a large network of 300 PRI delegates that had been awarded debit cards from the bank. Each debit card allegedly provided access to 60 thousands pesos for use during the election campaign. The PRI has stated that they used the Monex prepaid cards to pay for organizational matters, to pay local helpers. The IFE's financial oversight unit uncovered that the bank had indeed been used to transfer money from another bank account containing 70 million pesos to finance 9,924 bank cards for PRI members. Although the Electoral Tribunal ruled that this did not provide direct evidence of vote buying, this situation is still under investigation. The Lower House created a special commission to investigate it and to issue a report which will be sent to the Federal Electoral Tribunal.

        The Soriana scandal unfolded on the day after the elections, when the Soriana department stores saw a huge influx of people with store debit cards. Rumors that the PRI had engaged in vote-buying culminated in the presentation of a formal complaint by the PRD. During the post-election period, these cases served as one of the main arguments of the appeal submitted to the TEPJF by the political coalition Movimiento Progresista. This appeal sought to the invalidation of the July 1, 2012, presidential election, based on allegations that the election violated constitutional principles of free and fair elections (file number: SUB-JIN-359/2012). The coalition alleged that hidden financing had occurred through the banking institution MONEX S.A. as part of a vote-buying scheme. On August 30, 2012, the TEPJF ruled against the appeal, declaring the arguments presented to be groundless. The TEPJF ruling validated the July 1 presidential election and declared that Enrique Peña Nieto had indeed been elected president of the United States of Mexico."

        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
        • Diego de la Mora Budgets and Public Policy Area Coordinator Fundar, Center for Analysis and Research August 7, 2014

        • Boletin de Prensa (Press Release) Alianza Civica July 3, 2012 http://www.alianzacivica.org.mx/archivos/pub/4434Informe%203%20de%20julio%202012.pdf

        • La compra de votos en las elecciones de México (Vote buying in the elections in Mexico) CNN Mexico July 6, 2012 http://blogs.cnnmexico.com/aristegui/2012/07/06/la-compra-de-votos-en-las-elecciones-de-mexico/

        • Movimiento Progresista se contradice sobre compra de votos (Progressive Movement contradicts itself on vote-buying) http://www.animalpolitico.com/2012/07/hubo-5-vias-de-compra-del-voto-movimiento-progresista/#ixzz3BFpgHB1P

        • Soriana y el PRI desconocen los monederos electorales (Soriana and the PRI do not recognise prepaid cards) Jesus Ugarte July 4, 2012 ADN Politico http://www.adnpolitico.com/2012/2012/07/04/soriana-y-el-pri-desconocen-los-monederos-electorales

        Robo de material electoral y compra de votos, las irregularidades (Theft of Electoral material and vote-buying, the irregularities) July 2, 2012 CNN Mexico http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/07/02/robo-de-material-electoral-y-compra-de-votos-las-irregularidades

        -Compra de votos, falta de boletas en casillas especiales y acarreo, las quejas recurrentes (Vote-buying, special voting booth ballots missing and hauling, the recurring complaints) Editorial July 1, 2012 Sin Embargo http://www.sinembargo.mx/01-07-2012/282887

        • Compras de pánico en Soriana ante el temor de que el PRI cancelara tarjetas (Panic shopping in Soriana due to terror that the PRI would cancel the prepaid cards) Josefina Quintero July 3, 2012 http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2012/07/03/capital/033n1cap

        • Monex, vinculado a compra-venta de votos para el PRI, tiene historial de lavado de dinero para el narco (Monex linked to vote buying for the PRI, has a history of money laundry for drug cartels) Editorial Magazine Sin embargo July 14, 2012 http://www.sinembargo.mx/14-07-2012/297848

        • Izquierda presenta más de 200 mil firmas como pruebas de compra de votos (Left presents over 200 thousand signatures as evidence of vote buying) Rosalía Vergara Magazine Proceso August 28, 2012 http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=318293

        • Elección 2012 fue más sucia que la de 2006, investigador (2012 election was more dirty than the 2006 one, researcher) Christian Rea Tiscareño Terra Mexico 2012 http://noticias.terra.com.mx/mexico/politica/elecciones/sucesion-presidencial/eleccion-2012-fue-mas-sucia-que-la-de-2006-investigador,972b1b8c71d58310VgnVCM4000009bcceb0aRCRD.html

        • Crecen acusaciones de compra de votos en elecciones mexicanas Olga R. Rodriguez Terra Mexico July 4, 2012 http://noticias.terra.com.mx/mexico/politica/elecciones/2012/crecen-acusaciones-de-compra-de-votos-en-elecciones-mexicanas,f178ceb107058310VgnVCM10000098cceb0aRCRD.html

        • Fortalezas y Debilidades del Sistema Electoral Mexicano (2000-2012) (Strengths and weaknesses of the Mexican Electoral System 2000-2012) Integralia Consultores June 2013 http://www.integralia.com.mx/publicaciones/ResumenEjecutivoFortalezasYDebilidades.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Pg. 30. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource

        TEPJF ruling SUB-JIN-359/201 August 30, 2012 http://www.te.gob.mx/Informacionjuridiccional/sesionpublica/ejecutoria/sentencias/SUP-JIN-0359-2012.pdf

      • expand button!
        32
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent do civil society organizations use political finance data?More about indicator

        According to the interviewed experts, there are only a few civil society organizations that have used political finance data for their analysis. In general, civil society organizations in Mexico focus more on monitoring the election process and not necessarily parties´ finances.

        The reason, as Jorge Romero explains - who is an expert on budgets, public policy and accountability - is because “until now, there wasn´t much room to monitor parties finances. But now, with the recently reforms to the Constitution on Transparency and Electoral issues, political parties´ finance information will become timely and comprehensive. At this moment, we know how much parties are spending in very general terms; however, we do not know the specifics. Political Parties were not obliged to inform or provide this information. This is something new and we will need to see how we can begin to use more this information“.

        According to Oscar Arredondo, an expert on budgets and public policy, very few organizations use use financial data. As a matter of fact, the majority of the CSOs in Mexico have a tendency to monitor elections in terms of the debate, spaces for corruption, vote-buying, etc. They use election information to inform the debate rather than discuss expenditures undertaken during campaigns, funding, etc. Just Dupuy, an expert in transparency and accountability, mentioned that is was very complicated to monitor political parties´ funds during campaign due to the lack of timely information.

        Multiple organizations, including Mexico Evalúa, Propuesta Civica, Mexicanos Primero, have engaged in some way with political finance. Of these organizations, however, only Mexico Evalúa has actually disseminated a document focusing on political finance, having used official data to undertake an analysis of how much elections cost in Mexico and to determine the level of transparency in political parties´ finances, especially focused on public resources.

        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
        • Jorge Romero Leon International Consultant on transparency, accountability and public policy August 22, 2013

        • Justine Dupuy Researcher Fundar Center for Analysis and Research August 7, 2012

        • El Costo de las Elecciones Presidenciales 2012 (The Cost of the 2012 Presidential Elections) Mexico Evalua 2012 http://www.scribd.com/doc/124499894/Version-final-de-Costo-electoral

      • 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

        During the past 10 years there have been several reforms that have intended to strengthen the autonomy of political parties - through public financing - while at the same time establishing oversight mechanisms to reduce the spaces for political corruption and the use of illicit resources in campaigns. There have been two major political electoral reforms in Mexico: the first in 2007-2008 and the second one in 2014. Both of these reforms had direct implications on political parties´ finances not only in terms of the amount of resources that they would obtain, but also in terms of defining very clear rules on oversight and transparency, particularly during campaign processes.

        We could say that the 2007 reform discussion began after the election that was held in in the year 2000. The last electoral reform that had been approved prior to these elections was in 1996 and at the time, the Constitution had already established that political parties would receive public funding, that there would be an oversight institution -the Federal Electoral Institution- which would oversee the electoral process and other clear rules had been established in order to regulate the electoral process in Mexico. However, during the 2000 election two major scandals surfaced: 1) the PRI had used in its campaign resources that came from the state-oil company´s union 2) Fox -who then became president of Mexico- had used resources that were triangulated from an NGO into his campaign illegally. These two incidents had proven that the 1996 reform had flaws and that the electoral law needed to be reformed again.

        Many initiatives were presented to reform and regulate electoral processes but it was not until 2007 when the legal framework was reformed. It is important to recall that in 2006, Mexico had presidential elections, where Calderon was elected. During the 2006 elections, there were numerous irregularities. To begin, it was believed that state resources had played a key component in obtaining the presidency -in 2000 the PAN won and in 2006 the same party won the administration was again. Second, a negative campaign against Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador was also launched. In addition, the margin between both candidates was less than 1% which put in doubt the legitimacy of the process.

        Some of the reforms of 2007 were:

        • Political Parties were banned from any type of corporate affiliation and they acquired obligations in terms of transparency and accountability.
        • Precampaigns and their time periods were regulated.
        • Official Publicity was also restricted so that it could not be done during electoral periods.
        • The IFE would be the only entity in charge of administrating and distributing airtime.
        • The formula which determines public financing was modified. Now it uses the minimum salary of the Federal District and it is based on affiliated members and results of the last immediate election.
        • The law makes a clear distinction between ordinary expenses and those undertaken during campaign periods.
        • Limits to contributions and donations from affiliated members and supporters are clearly established.
        • It prohibits negative campaigns and establishes that the IFE is the only entity in charge of distributing and acquiring airtime for campaigns.

        According to Alfredo Figueroa, former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013, political parties funding suffered profound changes with the 2007 reform, where a formula was developed which would be used to distribute resources to parties. With this reform there was an increase in the amount of resources that parties receive“.

        The electoral legal framework was once more reformed in 2014. The last reform was also Constitutional and Legal. The latest reform included the possibility to have Independent Candidates running in elections, it included numerous dispositions on transparency and accountability. Furthermore, it establishes clear guidelines for political parties to report on the origin and use of their resources. In addition, it also transforms the Federal Institution into a National one. This change allows the new institution to have additional responsibilities especially when it comes to local elections. In addition, it regulates the use of airtime, which was already regulated but it makes it more transparent and equitable. In terms of oversight, it transfers the responsibility of overseeing political parties directly to the General Council.

        The context that brought about this reform was the last election which was held in 2012. In it, there were numerous allegations on excessive use of airtime outside of the campaign period but which might have shifted the balance towards one of the candidates; candidates spent more than was fixed as the campaign spending limit; triangulation of resources was used to bring in additional resources into the campaigns; prepaid cards which were supposedly used to buy votes. Due to these numerous scandals, there are several violations which have now been included in the Constitution and for which the election can be annulled -this was not possible before.

        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
        • Dr. Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013 August 27, 2014

        • Jorge Romero Leon International Consultant on transparency, accountability and public policy August 22, 2013

        • Ismael Estrada Professor on Electoral Right University of the State of Mexico and the August 18, 2014

        • Analisis Comparativo de la Reforma Electoral Constitucional y Legal 2007-2008 (Comparative Analysis of the Constitutional and Legal Electoral Reform 2007-2008) Instituto Federal Electoral November 2008 http://www.ife.org.mx/documentos/ReformaElectoral/docs/ACRefElect0708.pdf

        • Fiscalización y Transparencia del Financiamiento a Partidos Políticos y Campañas Electorales: Dinero y Democracia (Oversight and Transparency of Political Parties Funding and Electoral Campaigns: Money and Democracy) Eduardo Guerrero Gutierrez Auditoria Superior de la Federación http://www.asf.gob.mx/uploads/63SeriedeRendicionde_Cuentas/Rc6.pdf

  • expand button!

    Third Party Actors

    More about category
    composite
    33
    • expand button!
      Applicability of the Law to Third-Party Actors
      More about category
      • expand button!
        34
        Score
        YES
        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

        In Mexico, third party actors are not permitted in the campaign process. Article 41 of the Constitution establishes that political parties are the entities in charge of promoting citizens´participation in democratic life. The article also states that trade asociations and any other form of corporate affiliation cannot intervene in the creation of parties. Furthermore, it also establishes that political parties -directly or through third parties- cannot hire spaces in radio or television. After the 2006 election where other actors intervened in the campaign process -companies and organizations made campaigns to publicly support a candidate which had an impact in the final outcome- the involvement of third actors was prohibited. For this reason, every political event is organized and funded directly through the party and with the amount of resources established by the National Electoral Institute, as tipulated by Article 41 of the Constitution..

        As related information, there are regulations governing the disclosure of organizations supported by Parties themselves. The Political Parties General Law, article 30, establishes that: “ 1. It is considered as political parties public information: r) The list of foundations, centers and capacity or research institute or any other that receives economic support from the political party.“

        This article establishes that political parties have the obligation to publish a list of organizations that receive resources from them. Yet, it does not mention that they should also publish itemized information on the use of these resources.

        However, article 12 of the Federal Transparency and Access to Information Law establishes that every obligated subject must deliver and publish all the information related to the amounts and the people that received public resources, as well as the reports that these people hand in on the use and destination of those resources. It is important to mention that article 11 has established political parties as an obligated subject bound to comply with the Federal Access to Information Law and for this reason, they must report on third-party actors that receive resources from them.

        It is important to mention that this law is new and that it is yet to be implemented. At the moment, the amount of information available regarding foundations, organizations and any other third-party that receives funds from parties is very limited and in some cases, non-existent. Now, with the new law, if the Technical Oversight Unit requires information from a private entity, the entity has five days to provide it (article 200)

        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
        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales) (Institutions and Electoral Procedures General Law) Article 200 May 23, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LGIPE.pdf

        • Ley General de Partidos Políticos (Political Parties General Law) Articles 30 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGPP.pdf/9822763c-6956-4a81-9722-05c6de5bd661

        -Ley Federal de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública Gubernamental (Federal Transparency and Access to Information Law) Article 11 July 14, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/244_140714.pdf

        • Reglamento del Instituto Nacional Electoral en Materia de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública (National Electoral Institute´s Bylaw on Transparency and Access to Information) National Electoral Institute Article 11 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/276852/2014RegtoTransparencia.pdf/8dffabb3-fed9-421a-80f9-2b9ebff9d879

        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.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

        As noted in #34, third party actors (unions, organizations, foundations, corporations) cannot legally intervene in the campaign. During the 2012 election there was evidence of the involvement of third parties. There are two concrete cases: one is the Soriana Case where it is stated that the PRI bought prepaid cards to influence votes or to buy votes. There is another case, the Monex case, where it is said that the PRI used the Financial Group to fund the campaign. Third party actors did not report financial information in either of these cases. However, it must be noted that neither case was proven.

        As additional related information, to date, third actors who receive resources or support from political parties have not provided reports to the National Electoral Institute. Before the Constitutional reforma on Transparency and Electoral Process, political parties were not obliged to provide information on itemized contributions. So when it came to third parties receiving resources from political parties, the situation became worse.

        According to Jorge Romero, an expert on public policies and transparency issues in Mexico, “until now, political parties are obliged subjects due to the legal framework changes on transparency. With the new reform, anyone who receives resources from the government must report how resources were spent. This is completely new, it has not been implemented yet“. At the moment, political parties have begun to upload lists of the foundations, organizations and other third parties which receive resources from them. However, information on the amount of resources disbursed is not available.

        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

        Ernesto Núñez Editor of the Reforma´s Supplement Newspaper Reforma August 19, 2014

        Jorge Romero Leon International Consultant on transparency, accountability and public policy August 22, 2013

        Informe Anual sobre el Origen y Destino de los Recursos Partido Accion Nacional 2012 (Annual Report on the Origins and Use of Resources 2012) National Action Party http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPAN.pdf

        National Action Party Website Transparency http://www.pan.org.mx/transparencia/ Accessed September 2014.

        IFE no castiga PRI (The IFE doesn't punish PRI) El Economista January 29, 2014 http://eleconomista.com.mx/sociedad/2014/01/29/ife-no-castiga-pri-tarjetas-soriana)

        Los tiempos de Justicia en México. Justicia electoral. El caso Monex y la multa al PRD (Times of Justice in Mexico. Electoral Justice. The Monex case and the fine on the PRD) Mariana Garcia, Mexico Evalua Animal Politico http://www.mexicoevalua.org/los-tiempos-de-la-justicia-en-mexico

      • 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

        As noted in #34, third party actors (unions, organizations, foundations, corporations) cannot intervene in the campaign. During the 2012 election there was evidence of the involvement of third parties. There are two concrete cases: one is the Soriana Case where it is stated that the PRI bought prepaid cards to influence votes or to buy votes. There is another case, the Monex case, where it is said that the PRI used the Financial Group to fund the campaign. Third party actors did not report financial information in either of these cases, and no information is directly available to the public.. However, it must be noted that neither case was proven.

        As additional related information, to date, third actors who receive resources or support from political parties have not provided reports to the National Electoral Institute. Before the Constitutional reforma on Transparency and Electoral Process, political parties were not obliged to provide information on itemized contributions. So when it came to third parties receiving resources from political parties, the situation was worse.

        According to Ernesto Nuñez, who is Editor Chief of the newspaper Reforma´s supplement, “obtaining information from third parties who receive resources from political parties is very hard. We know that the PRI and PAN and every other party provides resources to foundations. How much? It is practically impossible to know. None of this information operates under the principle of full disclosure“.

        According to Jorge Romero, an expert on public policies and transparency issues in Mexico, “until now, political parties are obliged subjects due to the legal framework changes on transparency. With the new reform, anyone who receives resources from the government must report how resources were spent. This is completely new, it has not been implemented yet“.

        At the moment, political parties have begun to upload lists of the foundations, organizations and other third parties which receive resources from them. However, information on the amount of resources disbursed is not available. In addition, foundations and organizations´ websites, who we know receive funding from political parties, have not included a section where their financial information is provided nor is a list of donors included.

        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
        • Ernesto Núñez Editor Chief of the Reforma´s Supplement Newspaper Reforma August 19, 2014

        • Jorge Romero Leon International Consultant on transparency, accountability and public policy August 22, 2013

        • Informe Anual sobre el Origen y Destino de los Recursos Partido Accion Nacional 2012 (Annual Report on the Origins and Use of Resources 2012) National Action Party http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-Formatos/Formatos-Docs/2012/2012IAPAN.pdf

        National Action Party Website Transparency http://www.pan.org.mx/transparencia/

        IFE no castiga PRI (The IFE doesn't punish PRI) El Economista January 29, 2014 http://eleconomista.com.mx/sociedad/2014/01/29/ife-no-castiga-pri-tarjetas-soriana)

        Los tiempos de Justicia en México. Justicia electoral. El caso Monex y la multa al PRD (Times of Justice in Mexico. Electoral Justice. The Monex case and the fine on the PRD) Mariana Garcia, Mexico Evalua Animal Politico http://www.mexicoevalua.org/los-tiempos-de-la-justicia-en-mexico

      • 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

        As noted in #34, third-party actors (unions, organizations, foundations, corporations) cannot intervene in election campaigns. During the 2012 election, however, there was hearsay about involvement of third parties. One prominent example of this are news reports that speculated about the involvement of Elba Esther Gordillo, the president of the prominent teachers' union, in the campaign of Gabriel Quadri, presidential candidate of the New Alliance Party (Panal). During and after the election process, the financial oversight unit of the IFE revised the campaign reports of Quadri (and of all other presidential candidates). It discovered that two associates of Gordillo had contributed significant donations to the Quadri campaign. Nevertheless, these donations fell within the limits of the law. Indeed, it's important to note that these contributions were made by members of the union, not by the union itself. Therefore, the union per se was not directly involved.

        This example is illustrative of the way in which third-party actors may work to influence campaigns. On the one hand, the IFE (now INE) has set up a very rigorous financial auditing system that is able to capture all financial transactions between political parties and other actors - such as third actors. Given that the monitoring unit focuses not only on party income, but also seeks to actively investigate party expenses, they are able to identify campaigns expense that may have been financed by third actors. The IFE's monitoring of billboards or campaign events, for example, allows the monitoring unit to identify expenses that the party needs to justify later on.

        What the monitoring unit is unable to capture is the extent to which third-party actors are involved in campaign activities in more informal manners. They may be able to trace the expenses involved in renting busses to bring supporters to a campaign event, but it is hardly likely that they can capture monetary rewards handed out beforehand to supporters for their participation in these events. It is these informal transactions that are difficult to monitor and where third-party actors can nevertheless play a very important campaigning role.

        In Mexico, Political Parties have created foundations or organizations that function as operating arms in diverse areas. Some of these organizations focus on undertaking legislative research, others are devoted to promote the values of each party and other and organizations that decide to adhere to the party because they share principles. However, this organizations cannot do campaigning in favor of a candidate. They might have a preferred candidate but campaigning is responsibility of political parties directly.

        Parties like the Revolutionary Institutional Party (Partido Revolucionario Institucional), have: - Sectors: organizations that are linked to those sectors that they support directly. In this case, the PRI supports agricultural, popular and labor. - Political Organizations - Adhering Organizations

        To distribute resources to them, the Executive Committee of the Party with the Financial Secretary distribute resources to their organizations, institutes, foundations, etc. Although these organizations have a political affiliation, they are independent. For this reason, they cannot undertake proselytism in favor or against a candidate.

        In the case of the National Action Party (Partido Accion Nacional) they also have their own foundations and organizations, which work as research institutes for the party. According to the PAN´s website, resources from the party are not distributed to these organizations; however, analyzing the parties´ 2012 report, the Party hires services from their Foundation, for example.

        All of these organizations, publish documents which inform on the actions that their party has undertaken, information on their campaign platform, or they also develop workbooks to explain recent reforms.

        It is important to mention that parties´ foundations, organizations, etc, can also receive public and private donativos. Unfortunately, none of this information is transparent.

        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

        Ismael Estrada Professor on Electoral Rights University of the State of Mexico and the August 18, 2014

        Jorge Romero Leon International Consultant on transparency, accountability and public policy August 22, 2013

        Reports of the review by Party Partido Accion Nacional (National Action Party) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-DictamenesCG/DictamenesCG-Docs/2012/05PANIA2012.pdf

        Reports of the review by Party Partido Revolucionario Institucional (Institutional Revolutionary Party) 2012 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UF/UF-PP/IA-Fiscalizacion/IA-DictamenesCG/DictamenesCG-Docs/2012/06PRIIA2012.pdf

        Listado de las fundaciones, centros o institutos de investigación y capacitación, o cualquier otro, que reciban apoyo económico permanente del partido político (List of the foundations, centers or research and capacity institutes or any other that receives financial support from the political party) Partido Revolucionario Institucional (Institutional Revolutionary Party) 2014 http://pri.org.mx/TransformandoaMexico/Documentos/Transparencia/Listado2014.pdf

        Animal político (July 14, 2011) "El PRD denuncia a Elba Esther y al Panal ante la PGR" http://www.animalpolitico.com/2011/07/el-prd-denuncia-a-elba-esther-y-al-panal-ante-la-pgr/ October 24, 2014

        CNNmexico.com (April 7, 2012) "“Yo no soy siervo de nadie”, dice Gabriel Quadri" http://blogs.cnnmexico.com/la-grilla/2012/04/07/%E2%80%9Cyo-no-soy-siervo-de-nadie%E2%80%9D-dice-gabriel-quadri/ October 24, 2014

        Cnnmexico.com (May 17, 2012) "Elba Esther Gordillo niega que Gabriel Quadri sea su amigo o su cómplice" http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2012/05/17/elba-esther-gordillo-niega-que-gabriel-quadri-sea-su-amigo-o-su-complice October 24, 2014

        Oronoticias (March 7, 2013) "Cómplices de Gordillo fondearon campañas de Quadri y del PANAL" https://oronoticias.mx/nota/79983/Complices-de-Gordillo-fondearon-campanas-de-Quadri-y-del-PANAL October 24, 2014

        Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource

  • expand button!

    Monitoring and Enforcement

    More about category
    composite
    81
    • 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

        The electoral law in Mexico establishes that political parties will be overseen by an independent authority that has investigative and audit powers. According to the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law, article 32, the National Electoral Institute has the attribution to oversee political parties´and candidates´ income and expenditures. In addition, article 190 establishes that political parties´ and campaign expenditures will be monitored by the National Electoral Institute´s General Council through its oversight commission. This commission will have a Technical Oversight Unit which will be in charge of reviewing all the reports and putting together the information for the General Council. It´s important to mention that although the General Council has members of political parties, these are not part of the Oversight Commission nor of the Technical Oversight Unit. The Oversight Commission is integrated by 5 Electoral Counselors -who are citizens and were appointed by the Legislative- and these are chosen by the whole General Council, which has the intention of guaranteeing its independence and objectivity.

        Artícle 191 states that the General Council´s faculties are to oversee that the origin and use of political parties´ resources abide the law and to assign the Electoral Counselors that will be part of the Oversight Commission and to assign the head of the Technical Oversight Unit.

        Article 192 states that the Electoral Counselors, members of the Oversight Commission, will not be able to intervene or interfere in the work done by the Technical Oversight Unit independently, in order to guarantee at all times oversight principles.

        Article 196 clearly states that the Technical Oversight Unit is the organ in charge of receiving and reviewing the reports presented by the political parties regarding the origin and use of all of their resources, as well as to investigate complaints and procedures regarding political parties´ accountability.

        In addition, article 199 establishes that the Technical Oversight Unit´s faculties are to audit with full independence the supporting documents, as well as the accountability presented by the political parties and of the independent candidates. Article 190 states that in the auditing activities of the Technical Oversight Unit supersede bank, fiscal and fiduciary secrets.

        Article 425 also establishes that the oversight unit will also be in charge of overseeing Independent Candidate´s incomes and expenditures and that they also have the faculty to undertake audits.

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Article 32, 190, 191, 192, 196, 199 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

      • expand button!
        39
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, high-level appointments to the oversight authority are based on merit.More about indicator

        The electoral laws establish that the members of the General Council, which is the electoral body in charge of overseeing political parties´ finances, will be formed by people who have a certain level of professionalism; however, their appointment is not necessarily based on merit, and the law does not establish that its members must not be affiliated to a party, for example. It establishes only that its members must not have been running for an election during the past years or that they should not have been the leaders of a party also during the past years.

        The electoral laws establish that the National Electoral Institute´s General Council is the organ in charge of overseeing political parties finances. The General Council will oversee political parties´ finances through the oversight commission, which will have a Technical Oversight Unit which will review the reports and verify all the information provided by the parties and will undertake the necessary audits and investigations.

        The General Council is integrated by a President Counselor, 10 Electoral Counselors, Legislative Counselors, political party representatives and an Executive Secretary (article 36).

        • President Counselor: same requirements as the Electoral Counselors
        • Electoral Counselors: will be determined by a commission integrated by three people from the Legislative, two from the Human Rights Commission and two from the guarantor body established in article 6 of the Constitution. An open call will be published and the commission to review and interview applicants. This information will be sent to the political organ of the Legislative, who will then provide the necessary information to the Lower House so that each candidate can be voted.
        • Legislative Counselors: determined by each parliamentary group in the Legislative. Can attend all the meetings but without a vote. The Legislative and Senate must agree on their representative.

        In addition, when it comes to the Head of the Technical Oversight Unit, the law establishes the criteria which also include a certain level of professionalism but do not ban party affiliates, for example. According to the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law, article 197, the head of the Technical Oversight Unit will be assigned by the General Council in accordance to what is established in article 191. The article states that the head of the Technical Oversight Unit will have to comply with the same requirements established for the Institute´s Executive Directors and that the head must also prove a minimum of 5 years experience in oversight in a position of Director.

        The General Law states that the Head of the Technical Oversight Unit and the Executive Directors in the INE must meet the same requirements as the Electoral Counselors. Article 38 of the Law, establishes that, among other requirements, that the Counselors must posses a minimum of a 5 year antiquity, a university degree and the required knowledge and experience to undertake their functions. In addition, the article states that the person must not have been registered as a candidate or have had an elective position in the last 4 years or have been national or state political party director also in the last 4 years.

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Article 32, 36, 190 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

      • expand button!
        40
        Score
        75
        In practice, to what extent are high-level appointments to the oversight authority based on merit?More about indicator

        According to Fernando Agiss, former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE, choosing the electoral counselors is established in the Constitution in its article 41. Article 41 establishes that a technical council is created who will be in charge of vetting the candidates. The process under which the technical council interviews candidates is public. Once candidates have been short-listed, then the nominee list is sent to the Lower House´s Governing Body so that they can determine which are the final candidates. This process of deliberation is not public. Once a final list has been put together, then the Lower House has to ratify the counselors. This final stage is public just as every other session within the Lower House -sessions are televised.

        Last April, the recently created National Electoral Institute (before the Federal Electoral Institute) was appointed with 11 new Electoral Counselors who would integrate the Institution´s General Council. All these new members have a robust resumé with extensive experience in electoral processes, human rights, most of them are academics. However, the entity in charge of choosing these candidates did not publish any type of information that would explain why these candidates were chosen over others, limiting the transparency of the process. Furthermore, some of these new members have been linked to political parties, which also questions their independence.

        It´s important to mention that, in accordance to what is established in the Constitution article 41, the Legislative published an open call for citizens who wished to become an Electoral Counselor. With the open call, a specific timeline was included which marked the process that would be undertaken. In addition, an Technical Evaluation Committee was put together, to maintain the principles of independence, impartiality and non-partisan when choosing the candidates. Yet, the selection process was not documented.

        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

        Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE Agiss and Associates October 6, 2014

        Conoce a quiénes serán los nuevos Consejeros del INE (Meet the new Counselors of the INE) Elidet Soto Vertigo Político April 3, 2014 http://www.vertigopolitico.com/articulo/31318/Conoce-a-quienes-sern-los-nuevos-consejeros-del-INE

        • Es necesario acercarse a partidos para ser consejero: Ruiz Saldaña (You need to approach parties to become Counselor: Ruiz Saldaña) Angel Cabrera April 30, 2014 http://www.24-horas.mx/es-necesario-acercarse-a-partidos-para-ser-consejero-ruiz-saldana/

        • Habemus Consejeros Electorales (Con ADN Partidista) (Habemus Electoral Counselors, with a Partisan DNA) Fred Alvarez April 6, 2014 La Otra Opinion http://www.laotraopinion.com.mx/notas/habemus-consejeros-electorales--con-adn-partidista--/1539

        • No se documentó proceso de selección de consejeros al INE (The Selection Process of the INE´s Electoral Counselors was not documented) Ignacio Alvarez Hernandez March 27, 2014 Analisis a Fondo http://analisisafondo.com/index.php/politica/item/9448-no-se-documento-proceso-de-seleccion-de-consejeros-al-ine

        • Quién es Lorenzo Cordoba? (Who is Lorenzo Cordoba?) Milenio March 3, 2014 http://www.milenio.com/politica/ConsejeroPresidente-IFE-LorenzoCordovaVianello-perfil0_223177850.html

        • El INE de Lorenzo Córdova con matrícula INE2014 (The INE of Lorenzo Cordova) Raul Florez Rodriguez Sin embargo Abril 10, 2014 http://www.sinembargo.mx/opinion/10-04-2014/23046

        • Quienes son los Consejeros Electorales del nuevo INE? (Who are the Electoral Counselors of the new INE?) Ciudadanos en Red April 4, 2014 http://ciudadanosenred.com.mx/noticia/quienes-son-los-consejeros-electorales-del-nuevo-ine/

        • Consejeros del INE, con experiencia académica y en procesos electorales (INE´s Counselors, with academic experience and in electoral processes) La Cronica April 4, 2014 http://www.cronica.com.mx/notas/2014/826130.html

        • Perfiles de los cinco aspirantes a consejero electoral del IFE (Profiles of the 5 candidates to the IFE´s electoral counselor) ADN Politico April 13, 2013 http://www.redpolitica.mx/nacion/perfiles-de-los-cinco-aspirantes-consejeros-electoral-del-ife

        • Vinculados al PRI, varios aspirantes a consejeros del IFE (Various IFE candidates linked to the PRI) Jesus Cervantes Proceso November 11, 2013 http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=357686

      • expand button!
        41
        Score
        YES
        In law, the independence of high-level appointees is guaranteed.More about indicator

        The General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law in it article 35 establishes that the General Council is the highest management body responsible for monitoring compliance of the constitutional and legal provisions on electoral matters and to ensure that the principles of certainty, legality, independence, impartiality, objectivity and full disclosure guide all the activities of the Institute. This also includes overseeing political parties´ income and expenditures reports.

        Article 36 establishes that the General Council is formed by one President Counselor, 10 Electoral Counselors, Legislative Power Counselors, Representatives of each Political Party and an Executive Secretary. According to the law, Electoral Counselors will have a 9 year term, they will be removed in a staggered way and they cannot be reelected. The Executive Secretary will be named and removed with the 2/3 of the General Council´s votes. Political Party Representatives will be named and removed by the parties. These can attend the meetings with voice but without a vote.

        The General Council will have the faculty to appoint the head of the Technical Oversight Unit, which is the operating arm of the General Council to review political parties´ income and expenditures reports. To remove the head, it will require at least 8 votes from the General Council.

        Article 192 establishes that the General Council can directly order an audit of political parties´ finances or through third parties who are specialists in the matters. They can also order visits to verify the veracity of their reports.

        Article 35 of the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law states that the Legislative Counselors are determined are chosen by each parlamentary group within the Lower House; however, both Chambers -Legislative and Senate- need to approve each representative. The Lower House is responsible for nominating them. These counselors can attend all the meetings, they have voice but do not have a vote. Article 35 also establishes that these representatives of each political party can be subsitituted by them at anytime with prior notice. The Executive Secretary will be proposed by the Council´s President and will be nominated and removed by 2/3 of the Council´s vote. Article 41 establishes that the Executive Secretary will attend all the session with voice but without a vote. Article 50 establishes that the Executive Secretary will be 6 years in the position and can be reelected once.

        The Second Title, 1st Chapter of the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law establishes the laws regarding administrative responsibilities of the employees of the National Electoral Institute. Article 478 states that the Council´s President, the Electoral Counselors, the Executive Secretary and the local counselor, General Comptroller, Executive Directors, the head of the Oversight Unit, among others, will be considered employees of the INE. There is projection of due process. Article 483 establishes the possible sanctions which include the removal of the public officer from the position. It also states that when the process is being undertaken for the Council´s President and Electoral Counselors, the general comptroller will notify the President of the Lower House, so that they can resolve the sanction with 2/3 of their votes. If the case relates to the Executive Secretary, then the Comptroller General will present the case to the General Council.

        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

        Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
        (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Article 35, 36, 192, 478-483 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

      • expand button!
        42
        Score
        75
        In practice, to what extent is the independence of high-level appointees guaranteed?More about indicator

        According to the interviewed experts, the independence of high-level appointees and that of the oversight head is guaranteed. Furthermore, after reviewing news articles, during and after the 2012 election period, Electoral Counselors have not been removed with any issues relating them to the electoral period. It is important to mention that several Electoral Counselors stepped down due to the 2014 electoral reform; however, the Legislative encouraged former counselors to participate in the open call. Out of 11 Electoral Counselors, 3 were Counselors at the former Federal Electoral Institute.

        According to Alfredo Figueroa, “the 2007 constitutional reform established that the General Council´s Oversight Unit would be the entity in charge of undertaking the audits and investigations. This was a mistake. Now with the recent reform, it is again established that the General Council would have that function“.

        The former Counselor said that the experience with the independent unit generated several difficulties. He mentioned that at the time it was the General Council's job to judge the work that was done by the Unit. He said that he had had to undertake that task and that he did it with independence. But he also recalls how he warned about the immense public pressure over the Head of the Unit. In addition, he mentioned there were numerous differences when it came to making decisions. However, these differences were not necessarily attributed to a lack of independence. He said that there was a big difference of opinion. There are several articles and studies that suggest that the Council may be subject to politicization. However, definitive proof of such allegations is not available.

        Ernesto Nuñez, who is Chief Editor of the Reforma´s Supplement and an expert in politics, mentioned that one of the biggest problems during the 2012 election was that the management and the decisions made by the Unit were opaque, and for this reason there were numerous doubts regarding its independence. He said that many of the decisions that were made were not in line with what had been reported.

        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
        • Dr. Alfredo Figuero+F128a Fernandez Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013 August 27, 2014

        • Ernesto Núñez Chief Editor of the Reforma´s Supplement Newspaper Reforma August 19, 2014

        • Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at IFE Agiss and Associates August 12, 2014

        • Reforma política es fruto del consenso: Córdova (Political Reform is the result of consensus: Cordova) June 27, 2014 24 Horas http://www.24-horas.mx/reforma-politica-es-fruto-del-consenso-cordova/

        • Pide PRD remoción de consejero de Fiscalización IFE. (PRD asks for the removal of the Oversight Counselor) Grupo Formula January 29, 2013 http://www.radioformula.com.mx/notasimp.asp?Idn=300523

        • Preferencias en regulacíon electoral: partidismo en el IFE Presentation by Federico Estevez, Eric Magar, and Guillermo Rosas, presented at ITAM in March 2012 http://allman.rhon.itam.mx/~ebarrios/marzo2012/EricMagar.pdf

        • Elecciones 2012: lecciones no aprendidas (Elections 2012: Lessons Unlearned) February 23, 2011 CIDAC http://www.cidac.org/esp/cont/SemanaPolitica/Elecciones2012leccionesno_aprendidas.php

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

        The oversight authority that monitors political parties and that oversees election process is the National Electoral Institute (INE) and within the Institute it is the General Council who is the decision-making body. According to the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law and in practice, the General Council is the highest management body, responsible for overseeing compliance of the constitutional and legal provisions regarding electoral processes.

        The General Council is formed by 1 Council President, 1 Executive Secretary, 10 Electoral Counselors, 7 Legislative Counselors , 7 Political Parties´ Representatives. Out of these, only the President Council and the Electoral Counselors have voting powers. The Executive Secretary can attend all meetings with voice but without a vote. The Legislative Counselors can attend with voice but without a vote. The Political Party Representatives also have voice but no vote in sessions (Article 36 of the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law. The General Council has the faculty to oversee political parties finances, propose audits, investigations and to sanction political parties when these do not comply with the electoral laws. In addition, the General Council is also in charge of selecting the members of the Local Public Organisms, who are the entities in charge of overseeing local elections -however, local elections are still a central function of the INE.

        According to Alfredo Figueroa, former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013, “there are two types of analysis that the General Council undertakes. There are ordinary expenses. Political Parties present their annual reports, these are reviewed and expenditures are audited. On the other hand, there is the campaign period. So the General Council receives ordinary reports, campaign and precampaign reports. In addition to this, during the process of reviewing and ruling, audits are undertaken in order to review cost amounts with service providers. During campaigns, audits are undertaken on a constant basis. In addition, there is also the possibility of undertaking special investigations during the election period, which could lead to a sanction.

        Before the most recent reform of 2014, when a political party or actor made a complaint or reported a violation of the Law, the Technical Oversight Unit would evaluate it and then it would take the complaint to the General Council so that it could review it. However, the Technical Oversight Unit could dismiss a complaint and the General Council would not review these cases, yet they were informed. When a case was dismissed, it could be contested with the Federal Electoral Tribunal. The dismissal of a case had to be justified. In general, every complaint was looked into. Now, with the recent reform, it will be the proper General Council who will have to decide if a case is dismissed or not“.

        According to the Law, for the General Council to session, the majority of its members must be present. In addition, resolutions will be made by majority of votes.

        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

        Dr. Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013 August 27, 2014

        Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

        Cómo funcionara el nuevo INE (How will the new INE work) Rafael Morales ADN Politico http://www.adnpolitico.com/gobierno/2014/01/31/opinion-como-funcionara-el-ine-de-la-reforma-electoral

        Qué es la nueva sala especializada del Tribunal Electoral? (What is the new specialized chamber of the Electoral Tribunal) Nexos July 16, 2014 http://eljuegodelacorte.nexos.com.mx/?tag=procedimiento-especial-sancionador

        INE Website General Council Membership Lists. Accessed in September 2014. Legislative Counselors: http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/ConsejerosPoderLegislativoIntegracion/ Political Parties' Counselors: (http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/RepresentantesPartidosPoliticosIntegracion/

      • expand button!
        44
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent does the authority have sufficient capacity to monitor political finance regulations?More about indicator

        According to the people interviewed and to other statements made in the media and other relevant articles, the INE´s General Council has the capacity to monitor political finance regulations. If we look back at the former Federal Electoral Institute, which was the oversight entity operating during the 2012 elections, according to the interviewed people, it also had the capacity -in terms of financial resources and qualified personnel- to monitor finance regulations. At the time of the 2012 elections, it is believed that the Oversight Technical Unit undertook over 1000 audits and other special investigations. However, there was also a discussion around the capacity of the IFE to monitor all the expenses undertaken by parties during campaign processes. Interviewees stated that there was a perception that parties spent more than what they had reported and that this had to do with the lack of capacity to monitor events, expenditures, etc. Furthermore, the fact that reports were handed in 90 days after elections had taken place opened opportunities to manipulate financial reports. During the 2012 elections, the attributions of the IFE (now INE) were smaller in comparison to the amount of oversight they will have to undertake with the newly approved dispositions.

        It is very important to highlight that this is an important period in terms of evaluating the capacity because we are currently talking about a new institution, which is going to obtain a substantially higher budget to undertake the tasks that it recently acquired with the political electoral reform.

        According to recent statements made by the President Counselor, Lorenzo Cordova, he stated that the institution now has more attributions and thus requires more personnel to develop them, more resources to undertake them“. These declarations come from the fact that the recently established Institute´s budget will be 9% more than what they had obtained in past years -19 billion pesos. In addition, the Counselor President stated that this year they are going to develop an oversight system to monitor political parties finances, which also requires additional resources.

        When looking at the National Electoral´s Institute personnel, currently 2,246 people work at the Institute. Out of these, 1,816 have a Directive Function and 430 people work within the Units.

        According to the IFE´s White Book, during 2011-2012, the Federal Electoral Institute received nationally 1,587 complaints, out of these, 1,371 were considered special disciplinary procedures -these are considered special because they can have a direct effect on the election process, such as propaganda, acts of campaign outside the election period, etc- and 216 were ordinary disciplinary procedures. Out of the 1,371, 925 were settled at the district section, while 446 were settled within the General Council. Out of these 292 were resolved, while 69 were dismissed.

        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

        Dr. Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013 August 27, 2014

        Acuerdo del Consejo General por el que aprueba el Presupuesto del Instituto Federal Electoral para el Ejercicio Fiscal del año 2014. (Agreement of the General Council in which the 2014 the budget of the Federal Electoral Institute is approved) Instituto Nacional Electoral http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/DEA/DEA-PresupuestoInformes/DEA-PresupuestoIFE/PresupuestoIFE-docs/2014/CG397-2013_medidas-ppt-2014.pdf

        Numeralia del Servicio Profesional Electoral 2013 (Professional Electoral Service Numeralia 2013) Instituto Nacional Electoral http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UTSID/UTSID-InformacionRelevante/UTSID-NumeraliaSPE/2013/NumeraliaSPE15-04-2014.pdf

        Libro Blanco. Proceso Electoral Federal 2011-2012 (White Book. Federal Electoral Process 2011-2012) Instituto Federal Electoral 2013 http://www.ine.mx/documentos/proceso2011-2012/documentos/LibroBlancoPEF2011-2012.pdf

        Aumento de presupuesto del INE, por “74 nuevas atribuciones”: Córdova (INE´s budget increases due to 74 new attributions: Cordova) Aristegui Noticias http://aristeguinoticias.com/2808/mexico/aumento-de-presupuesto-del-ine-para-mejores-condiciones-laborales-y-ya-no-pagar-rentas-cordova/

        INE operará con Presupuesto de más de 11 mil mdp (INE will operate with Budget that is over 11 billion pesos) April 7, 2014 El Universal http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/nacion-mexico/2014/presupuesto-ine-elecciones-1001455.html

        Ajusta INE a la baja Presupuesto para 2015 (INE lowers its 2015 budget) August 27, 2014 El Universal http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/nacion-mexico/2014/ine-ajusta-presupuesto-para-2015-1033572.html

      • expand button!
        45
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent does the authority conduct investigations or audits when necessary?More about indicator

        According to the experts interviewed and to the reports and information available, the Federal Electoral Institute´s (now the National Electoral Institute) General Council undertook over 1,000 audits during the 2012 Presidential, Legislative and Senate Elections. During the 2012 process, the IFE had to undertake special investigations related to the PRI´s excessive expenditures (this was not an administrative audit because the special investigation came about from a complaint from other parties), the PRI´s supposed use of third party actors to distribute resources to buy votes, the PRD´s supposed use of non-profit organizations to triangulate resources to their campaign, etc. All of these were special investigations product of complaints from citizens, parties, etc.

        Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez, who was former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013, stated that during the 2012 elections the General Council undertook thousands of audits. He stated that there were Presidential, Legislatures and Senate candidates. In addition, during these elections 7 parties participated. In addition, this also included campaigns and precampaigns.

        According to the IFE´s White Book, during 2011-2012, the Federal Electoral Institute received nationally 1,587 complaints, out of these, 1,371 were considered special disciplinary procedures -these are considered special because they can have a direct effect on the election process, such as propaganda, acts of campaign outside the election period, etc- and 216 were ordinary disciplinary procedures. Out of the 1,371, 925 were settled at the district section, while 446 were settled within the General Council. Out of these 292 were resolved, while 69 were dismissed.


        Peer Reviewer comment: Agree. During the 2012 elections, the financial oversight unit had a very extensive capacity to monitor political finance regulations. The unit consists of six teams, each of which contains a subdirector, manager, senior auditors, auditors and junior auditors. Each team focuses on monitoring the party that is randomly assigned to them; the size of the team depends on the size of the party it monitors. The team members are rotated so as to prevent undue political influence. In addition, the UFRPP provides a course on the auditing of political parties in order to train new auditors in collaboration with the National Autonomous Mexican University’s (UNAM) Faculty of Accounting and dministration. The resolutions and norms authority is in charge of ordering investigations after complaints and irregularities that arise in the monitoring process, and designs resolutions on the imposition of sanctions; each of the five teams consists of a subdirector, manager, draftsmen A and draftsmen B. The UFRPP counts with a total of 220 staff members – the majority of whom are lawyers and accountants – and has an annual budget of 60 million pesos.

        The final campaign reports of the presidential, senatorial and Chamber of Deputies campaigns had to be handed in on October 8, 2012. The financial oversight unit paid attention to the errors and omissions it pointed out previously during the review of the preliminary reports and could count on the information collected during 1,883 inspection visits to the offices of 220 candidates for the Chamber of Deputies and 37 senatorial candidates. In addition, the unit witnessed and inspected 172 campaign events for the four presidential candidates. It presented a list of 7,805 names of politically exposed persons to the UIF (Financial Intelligence Unit) in order to check whether they had been involved in unusual, relevant or suspicious financial operations. Lastly, it made use of the database of 26,055 billboards and 3,551 political advertisements identified in the printed media to cross-reference these party expenses with sources of income.

        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
        • Dr. Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013 August 27, 2014

        • Libro Blanco. Proceso Electoral Federal 2011-2012 (White Book. Federal Electoral Process 2011-2012) Instituto Federal Electoral 2013 http://www.ine.mx/documentos/proceso2011-2012/documentos/LibroBlancoPEF2011-2012.pdf

        • Revisión de Informe Anual 2012 (Review of the Annual 2012 Report) Oversight Unit of Political Parties´ Finances National Electoral Institute http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/recursos/IFE-v2/UTSID/UTSID-InformacionRelevante/UTSID-ufrpp/AuditoriaIA20122709_13.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Pg. 23-26. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource

      • expand button!
        46
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent does the authority publish the results of investigations or audits?More about indicator

        According to the interviewed experts and to the information available, the results of the audits undertaken during election processes are public.

        According to Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez, former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013, stated that “all audits are public. These can contain personal data or sensible data but they are all public. In addition, the General Council´s sessions are also public“.

        The National Electoral Institute upload all the information related to the decisions undertaken by the General Council. This would include the deliberation of all the audits and investigations. Furthermore, the files of audits or processes undertaken to annul elections (for example) are also available. The time in which this information is upload is less than a month after their resolution; however, if a case is pending resolution or if it has been contested then it is not available.

        It is important to clarify that the IFE can undertake standard audits in which they analyze if the parties have complied with what was established by the law. And then, there are special investogations or audits, which usually are undertaken during electoral periods. According to Fernando Agiss, former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE, the amount of time an investigation takes place will depend on the complexity of the matter. For example, if the IFE detects that campaign publicity was not included in the report then the investigation can take up months due to the fact that the IFE becomes like a prosection and needs to gather all the evidence for the case. Once the IFE has gathered all the evidence, then they have up to 20 days to make a resolution. Once there is a resolution the reports are public.

        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

        Dr. Alfredo Figueroa Fernandez Former Electoral Counselor at the Federal Electoral Institute from 2008-2013 August 27, 2014

        Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at IFE Agiss and Associates August 12, 2014

        Juicio de Inconformidad. Expediente SUP-JIN 359/2012 (Nonconformity Judgement. File SUP-JIN 359/2012) Federal Electoral Tribunal http://www.ine.mx/documentos/proceso_2011-2012/documentos/SUP-JIN-359-2012.pdf

        Acuerdos, Resoluciones, Audios, Versiones estenográficas del Consejo General) (General Council´s Agreements, Resolutions, audio of session, etc) Instituto Nacional Electoral http://www.ine.mx/archivos2/portal/ConsejoGeneral/SesionesConsejo/acuerdos/

        Dictámenes del Consejo General (General Council´s Rulings on Political Parties´ financial reports) Instituto Nacional Electoral http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/OTIFEDictamenesyResolucionesdelConsejoGeneral/

        Proceso Electoral 2011-2012 (Electoral Process 2011-2012) Instituto Nacional Electoral http://www.ine.mx/documentos/proceso_2011-2012/preparacion.html

    • 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 Constitution of Mexico, in its article 41, states the amount of public resources that parties will receive for their campaigns, how airtime is divided. In addition, it also states that the the Law will determine the maximum contribution amount that supporters and affiliated members can give to parties, it shall order the procedures for the control and timely oversight during campaigns on the origins and use parties´ resources. In addition, it shall also establish the sanctions that shall be imposed in case of non-compliance with any of the dispositions contained in the article.

        Article 41 of the Constitution also states that the Law will establish the annulment system of federal elections due to serious and determinant violations, in which the campaign expenditures exceeds by 5% the authorised amount; if airtime or coverage in radio or television is bought, outside of what is authorised by the law; if illicit resources are obtained or used in campaigns.

        The General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law in its articles 441 to 451 establish a list of what is considered a violation of the Law.

        Article 441 establishes that the following are subject to liability if they commit any violations to the law: political parties, political groupings; applicants, candidates, and Independent Candidates for office; Citizens, or any person or entity; Election observers or election observer organizations; The authority or public servants of any of the branches of government; of local authorities; local government bodies; governing bodies of the Federal District; autonomous bodies, and any other public entity; Public notaries; Foreigners; Grantee radio or television; Citizen organizations seeking to form a political party; union, labor or employers, or any other corporate body; cult ministers; any other stakeholder.

        Article 443 establishes that is is considered a violation the breach of obligations regarding campaign spending limits and obligations regarding oversight and accountability of parties´ finances established by the Law. It is also considered a violation to not present Quarterly, Annual, precampaign and campaign reports, and to not attend the requirements made by the Technical Oversight Unit. It is also considered a violation to exceed the campaign spending limit established by the INE.

        Articles 445 establish that it will be considered a violation from candidates and precandidates, if they do not submit their precampaign and campaign reports, exceed the campaign spending limit, to solicit or receive in-kind of cash resources from people that aren´t authorized by this law. Article 446 establishes the same violations for independent candidates.

        Article 449 establish that it will be considered a violation if public officers do not respect the principle of impartiality, to use social programs to benefit a candidate.

        Finally, article 456 establish the type of sanctions that can be imposed due to violations of the Law.

        “I. With public reprimand; II. A fine of up to ten thousand time the daily minimum wage in the Federal District, depending on the seriousness of the offense. In cases of violation of the campaign spending limit, and violation of the limits applicable to donations or contributions from supporters, or candidates to their own campaigns, with the amount equal to what was spent in excess. If a relapse should occur, the penalty is up to twice what is established above. III. Depending on the severity of the offense, with the reduction of up to fifty percent of public funding ministrations. IV. In serious cases and in repeated violations of the Law, especially regarding the origins and use of resources, a political party´s registration will be cancelled.

        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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Articles 441- May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

        • Ley General en Materia de Delitos Electorales (General Law on Election Offenses) June 27, 2014 http://norma.ine.mx/documents/27912/310245/27jun2014_LGMDE.pdf/ca734d82-4e53-4e66-a778-75cd5c703b33

      • expand button!
        48
        Score
        YES
        In law, the oversight authority has the power to impose sanctions.More about indicator

        Article 41 of the Constitution establishes that oversight of political parties´ finances and campaigns will be the charge of the National Electoral Institute´s General Council. In addition, it also states that the Law will develop the Council´s attributions to undertake this function, as well as the definition of the technical organs that will depend on it and who will be responsible for undertaking the reviews and instructing the procedures to apply sanctions.

        Article 44 of the General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law establishes that one of the attributions of the General Council is imposing sanctions when it is required. Article 191 also establishes that in case that political parties do not comply with their obligations on oversight and accountability, they can impose the required sanctions.

        Article 459 establishes that the competent organs to process and resolve on the sanctioning process are the General Council, the Complaints and Claims Commission and the Election Disputes Technical Unit.

        However, article 470 establishes that if there are violations related to violations to the regulations established for airtime, electoral publicity or propaganda or anticipated campaign actions, then the entity in charge of processing the sanction is the Electoral Tribunal (article 473). In addition, if there is evidence of a public officer that has violated any of the electoral laws (for example, use of public resources), then the INE must transfer the case to the public officer´s immediate authority.

        Aside from these specific cases it is the National Electoral Institute that has the authority to impose a sanction to political parties and when it comes to public finances during and outside the campaign period, it is the General Council who will impose the 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
        • Constitución de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
          (Constitution of Mexico) Art. 41 1917, Relevant articles were last reformed on February 10, 2014 http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm

        • Ley General de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales (General Institutions and Electoral Procedures Law) Articles 44, 191, 459 May 23, 2014 http://norma.ife.org.mx/documents/27912/310245/2014_LGIPE.pdf/5201e72c-0080-4acb-b933-5137ef1c0c86

      • expand button!
        49
        Score
        25
        In practice, to what extent do offenders comply with sanctions imposed?More about indicator

        Political Parties almost always comply with fines imposed by the Federal Electoral Institute (now National Electoral Institute). However, there are mechanisms through which political parties can contest the sanction that were imposed by the INE with the Federal Electoral Tribunal. If the Tribunal ratifies what the Institute established, then parties need to pay. To pay the fine, the INE reduces the fine from the annual public resources that the party receives. This way, the party is obliged to pay their fines. Yet, there have been other cases where the Tribunal revokes what was established by the INE.

        In the past 2012 election, every political party was sanctioned due to excessive spending on campaigns -parties spent more than what was established as the campaign spending limit. The Democratic Revolution Party contested their fine. Something that is important to mention is that this is not the first time that parties are fined: parties are continuously fined for incurring in violations to the electoral Law.

        According to Fernando Agiss, former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at INE, the Tribunal does not neceserily revoke the IFE´s resolutions; however, many cases are returned so that they can be modified. This means that if the IFE submitted a case which was not as strong or lacked substantial evidence to sustain the sanction then the TRIFE (Tribunal Federal Electoral) asks the IFE to modify the sanction so as to give them another opportunity to make the case stronger. Fernando Agiss also mentioned that the TRIFE is shielded from politics due to its institutional composition. The TRIFE is formed by 7 judges who have to make decisions unanimously or with qualified majority, making it difficult for there to be external pressure or influence.


        Peer Reviewer comment: Agree. Parties are not the only ones liable to sanctions. The 2007/2008 Electoral Code (COFIPE) regulated that the financial oversight unit could order any individual or legal entity, whether public or private, to provide information that the unit required related to political party operations. Those who refused to cooperate would be subject to financial sanctions or public reprimand (Art. 81). This legal provision was an important one because it allowed the unit to cross-check the financial information it received from the parties. Nevertheless, the IFE General Council did not apply financial sanctions to citizens because the process through which personal sanctions have to be established is a complicated one in which the burden of proof lies with the IFE. Thus the IFE stuck to public reprimands, which were of little practical consequence.

        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

        Jorge Romero Leon International Consultant on transparency, accountability and public policy August 22, 2013

        Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at IFE Agiss and Associates August 12, 2014

        • Trife revoca multa de IFE al PVEM por campaña con actores (Trife revoques IFE´s fine to the PVEM for campaign with actors) 24 Horas February 7, 2013 http://www.24-horas.mx/trife-revoca-multa-que-ife-impuso-al-pvem-por-campana-con-actores/

        • Sanciones impuestas por año (Imposed Fines per Year) Instituto Nacional Electoral http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/Sanciones_Impuestas/

        • El IFE discutirá sanciones por gastos en campaña (The IFE discusses fines for campaign costs) Informador July 15, 2013 http://www.informador.com.mx/mexico/2013/471931/6/el-ife-discutira-sanciones-por-gastos-en-campana.htm

        • IFE debate reducción de 52 mdp en gastos de campaña Aristegui Noticias July 15, 2013 http://aristeguinoticias.com/1507/mexico/ife-debate-reduccion-de-52-mdp-en-gastos-de-campana/

        • Disminuye IFE sanciones por irregularidades en gastos de campaña 2012 (IFE reduces fines for irregularities in 2012 campaign costs) July 12, 2013 El Independiente http://www.elindependiente.mx/noticias/?idNota=19902

        • Sanciones millonarias a los partidos políticos por campaña 2012 las pagaran con recursos públicos (Million pesos fines to political parties for 2012 campaigns were paid with public resources) June 28, 2013 Redes Quinto Poder http://redesquintopoder.com/sanciones-millonarias-a-los-partidos-politicos-por-campana-2012-las-pagaran-con-recursos-publicos/

        • Peña Nieto libra sanción por actos anticipados de campaña (Peña Nieto avoids sanction for anticipated campaign acts) November 11, 2011 ADN Politico

        • El IFE avala multas a partidos por más de 341 mdp por los gastos de 2012 (IFE backs fines on parties for more than 341 mdp for the costs of 2012) CNN Mexico http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2013/07/15/el-ife-avala-multas-a-partidos-por-mas-de-341-mdp-por-los-gastos-de-2012

        Reviewer's sources: CO?DIGO FEDERAL DE INSTITUCIONES Y PROCEDIMIENTOS ELECTORALES (COFIPE) Federal Code of Electoral Institutions and Proceedings §81 January 14, 2008 http://www.ine.mx/archivos3/portal/historico/contenido/COFIPEpromocionvoto/

        Molenaar, FF (2012). Mexico Elections 2012: A Study of the Regulation and Oversight of Political Parties’ Financial Resources. Washington D.C.: IFES. http://www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/publications/mexico-elections-2012-a-study-of-the-regulation-and-oversight-of-political-parties-financial-resource

      • expand button!
        50
        Score
        --
        Open Question: How strong is enforcement, and what impedes more effective enforcement?More about indicator

        According to the experts interviewed, to the law operating at the time and to reports, during the 2012 election, the level of enforcement was not strong. Despite the numerous reform that have been approved in the past years to strengthen oversight during election periods, at the time there were several issues that hindered law compliance.

        One of the biggest limitations to enforcement was the timeline in which political parties submitted reports to the oversight authority which at the time was the Federal Electoral Institute (now, the National Electoral Institute). Political Parties had to submit their campaign reports up to 90 days after the election. For this reason, sanctions came several months after election day, making it extremely difficult to annul it. This situation created in a way incentives to avoid compliance.

        In addition, at the time, the causalities to annul the election were few and difficult. The causes to annul an election were in at least 25% of the voting centers suffered problems with the time, place, counting the votes, without any justified excuse; if citizens without a voting credential were allowed to vote; if citizens were not allowed to exercise their right to vote; if by error or with direct intent the votes were not computed adequately; if there was physical violence or pressure over citizens at the time of voting or counting the votes.

        It is important to mention that at the beginning of 2014, Mexico approved a political-electoral reform which in some way solves some of these issues. Now, political parties will have to submit information during election period, which will allow the National Electoral Institute to have insitu information. In addition, the Constitutional Reform has also included specific violations under which the elections would be annuled, violations which were not considered previously (exceeding campaign spending limit, buying airtime which is not considered within the limits of the law, using illicit resources or public resources in the campaign). Furthermore, now the National Electoral Institute will have faculties to impose sanctions directly to political parties.

        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
        • Jorge Romero Leon International Consultant on transparency, accountability and public policy August 22, 2013

        • Fernando Agiss Bitar Associate, Former Executive Director of Prerogatives and Political Parties at IFE Agiss and Associates August 12, 2014

        • Cuales son las rutas para anular una elección? Cesar Astudillo El Universal July 12, 2012 http://www.redpolitica.mx/nacion/cuales-son-las-rutas-para-anular-una-eleccion

The United States of Mexico consist of 31 states and a federal district. The federal republic has a directly elected presidential executive and a bicameral legislature consisting of the Lower House and the Senate.

The President is directly elected for a six-year-term through plurality voting in one national district, and cannot be reelected.

The Lower House is composed of 500 legislators. These representatives are renewed every three years through a mixed system: 300 representatives are elected through a system of plurality voting in single-member districts and the remaining 200 representatives through a system of proportional representation in five multimember districts of 40 seats each. Parties must present closed candidate lists in these multimember districts. Consecutive reelection of legislators used to be prohibited. A 2014 constitutional reform (decree 216) established that from the 2015 elections onwards, legislators may be reelected up to three terms.

The Senate consists of 128 members that are renewed every six years through a mixed system. The 31 states and the federal district each elect three senators: two are elected through plurality voting and the third is assigned to the party that obtained the second highest amount of votes. The remaining 32 senators are elected through a system of proportional representation in one national district. Consecutive reelection of senators used to be prohibited. A 2013 constitutional reform (decree 216) established that from the 2018 elections onwards, senators may be reelected for one additional term.

Political parties manage and fund the presidential, legislative, and senatorial campaigns. Towards this end, they mainly depend on public resources - such as public funding and free media access - that are distributed to the parties by the National Electoral Institute´s general Council based on formulas established in Article 41 of the Constitution. Campaign funding can also include private funding in the form of supporter´s donations and member contributions; however, the Constitution establishes donation limits for both candidates' individual contributions and for member/supporter contributions and donations. In addition, the law establishes that corporations, unions and any other legal entities are banned from providing resources to political campaigns. The private acquisition of media access is prohibited completely. As a result, election campaigns are funded almost completely by the state.

The last national elections for the Presidency, Lower House and Senate took place on July 1st, 2012 Tthe next Presidential, Lower House and Senate elections will be held in 2015. Due to a 2013 constitutional reform (decree 214), independent candidates will be allowed to run for elective office during the 2015 elections for the first time in 70 years.