Learn more

composite
44
44

Peru

In law
69
In practice
31

In law, the Peruvian system provides direct public funding for parties. However, in practice, funding has never actually been disbursed. Indirect public funding, in the form of free access to advertising during campaigns, is also provided for in law, though the in practice use of advertising slots did not fully align with legal prescriptions in the 2011 campaign. Non-financial state resources, especially staff, were frequently used for illegal campaign purposes in the run-up to the most recent elections. Anonymous donations are permitted in Peru, but all direct personal, corporate, and third party donations are capped. Electoral spending, however, is not limited in any fashion. The MPT evidence suggests that parties and candidates collected illegal contributions during the last campaign period. Reporting requirements mandate the filing of financial reports during and outside campaigns. In practice, however, parties often fail to comply with those requirements, and exclude some contributors from their reports. Some political finance data is made available online in pdf. The independent political activities of third party actors are not regulated, which allows a variety of organizations to influence campaigns in opaque ways. The National Electoral Authority (ONPE) monitors political finance, but it lacks the legal authority to carry out in depth audits or investigations. That said, its leaders are appointed on merit, and in practice, are independent of other branches of government. Nevertheless, the ONPE cannot and does not investigate or impose sanctions on violators. Current legislation does not provide the ONPE with the tools to more successfully regulate political finance in Peru.

  • expand button!

    Direct and Indirect Public Funding

    More about category
    composite
    43
    • expand button!
      Direct Public Funding
      More about category
      • expand button!
        1
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, there is direct public funding for electoral campaigns.More about indicator

        According to Article 29 of the Political Parties Act, “Only political parties that obtain representation in Congress receiving direct public funding”. The law does not permit the provision of direct public funds to individual candidates running for Congress or President “... these funds are part of the National Budget and are received by political parties for use in training and research during the five years following an election, as well as for ordinary operating expenses.” The law does not prohibit the use of public funds in electoral campaigns.

        The transfer of funds to each political party should be made at a rate of one-fifth of the total amount due per year for the five years following the election.

        But in addition, the Third Transitory Provision of the Political Parties Act provides that "The distribution of public funds under Article 29 applies from January 2007, according to the results of the last general elections for Congress and progressively, according to the budget estimates for such effects, and the potential of the national economy." That means the distribution of public funds will only be made if there is economic conditions to do so. In that context, the allocation of public funds to political parties is not an obligation

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 29. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

      • expand button!
        2
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, there is a transparent and equitable mechanism to determine direct public funding for electoral campaigns.More about indicator

        According to Article 29, “Only political parties that obtain representation in Congress receive direct state financing. The state will allocate the equivalent of 0.1% of the tax unit (*) for each vote to elect representatives to Congress.” That is, only political parties that have representation in Congress receive public funding within five years after the election.

        In addition, Article 29 states “The transfer of funds to each political party is made at the rate of one-fifth per year, forty percent distributed equally among all political parties represented in Congress and sixty percent in proportion to the votes obtained by each political party in the election of representatives to Congress.”

        No direct public funds are distributed to individual candidates running for Congress or President.

        The Third Transitory Provision of the Political Parties Act provides that "The distribution of public funds under Article 29 applies from January 2007, according to the results of the last general elections for Congress and progressively, according to the budget estimates for such effects, and the potential of the national economy. " That means the distribution of public funds will only be made if there are economic conditions to do so. In that context, the allocation of public funds to political parties is not an obligation.

        (*) Tax Unit (Unidad Impositiva Tributaria – UIT)

        Reference value used in order to maintain constant values in the tax base, deductions, limits involvement and other aspects of taxes that the legislature deems appropriate standards. It can also be used to apply penalties, determine financial obligations and other formal. The value of the tax unit is determined annually by Supreme Decree. Source: Peruvian Central Bank

        UIT (2014) = Peruvian Nuevo Sol 3,800 = US$ 1,357

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 29. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

      • expand button!
        3
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent is the mechanism to determine direct public funding for electoral campaigns transparent, equitable and consistently applied?More about indicator

        According to Article 29° of the Political Parties Act “the State will allocate the equivalent of 0.1% of the tax unit (*) for each vote to elect representatives to Congress.”

        But in addition, the Third Transitory Provision of the Political Parties Act provides that "The distribution of public funds under Article 29 applies from January 2007, according to the results of the last general elections for Congress and progressively, according to the budget estimates for such effects, and the potential of the national economy. " That means the distribution of public funds will only be made if there is economic conditions to do so. In that context, the allocation of public funds to political parties is not an obligation.

        Taking account of this Transitory Disposition, as Fernando Tuesta mentions, direct public funding was not distributed to parties during the term of Alan Garcia Perez (2006 - 2011), nor has it been disbursed under the current government. In the same way, Diana Chavez mentioned that electoral bodies (National Electoral Agency and National Electoral Jury) do not even request public funds during the Public Budget audiences in the Congress, and neither the budget proposal presented by the Executive Power nor the enacted public budget have included political party funding.

        In 2013, ten years after the adoption of the Political Parties Act and in an improving economic environment, the National Elections Jury, the National Electoral Agency, and the National Identity Register, all entities that are part of Peruvian Electoral System, promoted a new Political Parties Act (Proyecto de Ley No 03060 Nueva Ley de Partidos Políticos). This bill is currently in the hands of Congress. This new Act would annul the Third Transitory Provision in order to make the allocation of funds to parties obligatory.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. In October 2014, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the Parliament approved a proposal to implement the direct public funding during the fiscal year 2015. However the National Budget 2015 Act was approved by the Congress before the proposal, which is still under discussion. Eventually, the public direct funding could be included as an amendment to the budget.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014

        2. [news article] La plata no llega sola, by Fernando Tuesta (Former President of National Electoral Agency), La República, August 29, 2013. http://www.larepublica.pe/columnistas/politika/la-plata-no-llega-sola-29-08-2013

        3. [other] Proyecto de Ley No 03060 Nueva Ley de Partidos Políticos (New Political Parties Act Proposal) presented to the Congress on December 6, 2013 Explanatory Memorandum – Draft of New Political Parties Act http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/tradocestproc/Expvirt_2011.nsf/visbusqptramdoc/03060?opendocument

        Reviewer's sources: 1. [other] Alternative text by the Parliament Committee on Constitutional Affairs, September 11, 2014. http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/Sicr/TraDocEstProc/Contdoc0220112.nsf/d99575da99ebfbe305256f2e006d1cf0/e0b95ff9c11215b805257d50007ac32c/$FILE/TS00009110914.pdf

      • expand button!
        4
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the entity in charge of public funding make disbursement information publicly available?More about indicator

        No direct public funding is disbursed to parties. As a result, no disbursement information is publicly available. This despite the fact that, according to Article 29° of the Political Parties Act “the State will allocate the equivalent of 0.1% of the tax unit (*) for each vote to elect representatives to Congress.”

        The entity in charge of public funding is the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF). According to the public budget laws, any disbursement of public funds must be included in the public budget, which is presented by the MEF to Congress, who is then responsible for approving the annual public budget.

        The enacted public budget is released on the MEF website and in addition, if a citizen wants to access to this information, he/she can file a request with the MEF, ain accordance with the Access to Public Information Law.

        However, due to the Third Transitory Provision of the Political Parties Act, which makes direct public funding less than obligatory, no state funding has been distributed to parties. Tuesta and Chavez both highlight this fact. A new draft law, currently being considered by Congress, would repeal the Third Transitory Provision and obligate the disbursal of direct public funding regardless of the economic conditions.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014

        2. [news article] La plata no llega sola, by Fernando Tuesta (Former President of National Electoral Agency), La República, August 29, 2013. http://www.larepublica.pe/columnistas/politika/la-plata-no-llega-sola-29-08-2013

        3. [other] Explanatory Memorandum – Draft of New Political Parties Act, 2013. http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/tradocestproc/Expvirt_2011.nsf/visbusqptramdoc/03060?opendocument

    • 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

        According to Article 346 of Electoral Law and Article 1 of the Regulation of Neutrality, public authorities are prohibited: a) To participate in the electoral act to coerce, prevent or disrupt the freedom of suffrage, using the influence of his office or media that are provided their dealings. b) Practicing acts of any nature that favor or disadvantage certain party or candidate. c) Interfere, under any pretext, normal operation of the polling stations. d) Impose on persons whose membership under his authority to certain political parties or vote for a certain candidate, or to assert the influence of their charges to coerce the freedom of suffrage. e) Being part of a committee or agency or political propaganda for or campaign against any political organization or candidate. f) Delay of mail services or messengers that carry or transmit elements relating to the electoral process or official communications.

        According to Article 31 of the Political Parties Act, "Political parties, movements of regional or departmental level, and the political organizations of provincial and district level cannot receive contributions from: Any public entity or State company or involving it”.

        According to Article 5 of State Advertising Law “Public entities and agencies may not disburse budgetary resources for the benefit of a candidate for elective office or any political party.

        No public official of the entity or agency that are implementing an advertising campaign may appear in print materials, television and radio spots.”

        According to Article 6 of Electoral Propaganda regulation “State agencies, at all levels, may not carry electoral propaganda since the calling for elections. As such, they are prohibited for express or subliminal messages to promote, sponsor or favoring certain candidate or political parties…It is prohibited from using, offices or facilities belonging to any public entity of the national, regional and local levels, including National Army and National Police, to conferences, conventions, meetings, or any political act of electoral propaganda on behalf of any political party or individual candidate, as well as for the installation of boards or the operation of any partisan committee.”

        In addition, according to Article 8, section 3, of the Ethics Code for Civil Servants, public officials are prohibited from engaging in political campaigning in the course of their functions or through the use of infrastructure, public goods or resources, either for or against political parties or individual candidates.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. For the sub-national elections held on October 5 of 2014, the Ministry of Inclusion and Social Development (MIDIS) elaborated over the existing norms on neutrality and developed a specific resolution for the sector and for the five social programs under its jurisdiction to prevent the political usage of them by running candidates including those running for re-election.

        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

        Law No 26859 Electoral Law, 1997. Article 346. http://portal.jne.gob.pe/informacionlegal/Constitucin%20y%20Leyes1/LEY-ORGANICA-DE-ELECCIONES.pdf

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 31. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Law No 28874 State Advertising Law (Ley que Regula la Publicidad Estatal), 2006. Art. 5 https://apps.contraloria.gob.pe/postulaconlatuya/pdf/Ley%20que%20regula%20la%20Publicidad%20Estatal%20Ley%20N%2028874.pdf

        Regulation of State Advertising (Reglamento de Publicidad Estatal. Resolución N° 004-2011-JNE.), 2011. Article 5. http://portal.jne.gob.pe/informacionlegal/Constitucin%20y%20Leyes1/RES%20004-2011-JNE.-Reglamento%20de%20publicidad%20estatal.pdf

        Name: Regulation of Electoral Propaganda (Reglamento de Propaganda Electoral. Resolución N° 136-2010-JNE.), 2010. Title II-Restrictions and limitations on electoral propaganda. http://portal.jne.gob.pe/informacionlegal/Constitucin%20y%20Leyes1/Res.%20N%C2%B0%20136-2010-JNE.-%20Reglamento%20de%20propaganda%20electoral.pdf

        Law N° 27815 Ethic Code for Civil Servant (Código de Ética de la Función Pública), 2005. Article 8-3. https://apps.contraloria.gob.pe/postulaconlatuya/pdf/Ley%20del%20C%C3%B3digo%20de%20%C3%89tica%20de%20la%20Funci%C3%B3n%20P%C3%BAblica%20N%2027815.pdf

        Regulations of Neutrality (Disposiciones sobre Neutralidad. Resolución N° 014-2011-JNE.), 2011. Article 1. https://apps.contraloria.gob.pe/postulaconlatuya/pdf/Resolucion%2014%202011%20JNE-%20Disposiciones%20sobre%20neutralidad.pdf

        Reviewer's comment: Ministerial Resolution 186-2014-MIDIS: http://www.midis.gob.pe/dmdocuments/RM1862014MIDIS.pdf

      • expand button!
        6
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent are no state resources used in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates' electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        During the last National Election Campaign (2011), the National Electoral Jury (JNE) acknowledged 86 cases in which the neutrality of public officials was violated.

        The most important case of a violation of neutrality was an investigation opened against the President Alan García and five ministers in relation of an tv spot of an APRA candidate (APRA is Garcia's Political Party) in which some pictures of Alan García appeared. There were also some questions about whether the spot was financed by public resources, which would have been a gross violation of the Electoral Laws.

        The National Electoral Jury (JNE) reviewed the case. Thereafter, in a press release, the JNE said “About the tv spot broadcasted in December 2010 in which the image of the Head of State appears, the report of the National Board of Supervisors and Electoral Processes said that the tv spot was paid by APRA and therefore does not violate any regulation."

        In addition, it was not proved that García Pérez had consented that his picture be included in the tv spot, in which Garcia's photo appears next to the then candidate of the APRA party, Mercedes Araoz. In that context, the advertising agency had violated the law of use of private images, but not the political party. No sanctions were imposed on APRA and the case was closed. Mercedes Araoz resigned from the electoral campaign weeks later for other reasons.

        According to annual report of the Contaloria General de la República (National Audit Agency), during National Election Campaing (2011), 721 telephone complaints were received of which 60 were admitted after evaluating its pertinence according to the law.

        Of all the cases admitted, 14 were referred to the National Electoral Jury, 15 were referred to the public entities where the violation occurred in order to take measures ( prevent / eliminate violations), and one was alerted for post control. Another 30 events were dismissed.

        The cases were: • Using institutional furniture in support of candidates: use of materials, furniture, trucks, facilities, courtrooms and other property to support candidates (47%). • Using the working hours in support of candidates: public officials attending meetings in support of candidates during working hours (28%). • Using institutional portal for propaganda purposes: Use of the website and related resources to promote the candidacy (15%). • Using media for electoral propaganda: Using flyers and closed signal TV to promote candidates (10%).


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. There is ample evidence of the use of state resources in favor or against political candidates. This persists despite the existing regulations on this issue. Taking as an example only the last sub-national elections, there were many media reports regarding different situations of this kind. Examples include the use of vehicles to transport political supporters to public demonstrations, forcing staff of municipalities or regional governments running for re-election to attend public political events during working hours, and the use of public institutional infrastructure for storage of political dissemination materials.

        An official study with communication purposes commissioned by the Municipality of Lima was used to get information regarding the re-election campaign of the Mayor and to test the acceptance of political figures among interviewees in order to ellaborate the list of candidates. On the side of the government, results of the campaign led by the Ministry of Inclusion and Social Development to prevent the political abuse of social programs showed that 30 candidates tried to make use in different ways of the five major social programs in the country, according to citizens complains. Finally, the Comptroller Office implemented the campaign "Postula con la tuya" to encourage authorities to not use state resources in their political campaigns. After evaluating 260 complains from citizens, the Comptroller Office sent 39 communications to the National Electoral Jury reporting the abuse of state resources.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Victoria Echeandía, Chief of Citizen Services, National Electoral Jury. July 21, 2014
        2. [news article] Accepted complaint against the head of state for proselytizing. Semana Económica. January 12, 2011 http://semanaeconomica.com/article/economia/67409-admiten-denuncia-contra-jefe-de-estado-por-proselitismo/
        3. [other] Jurado Nacional de Elecciones (National Electoral Jury) Press releases JEE Lima Center opens investigation against Presidential Office and four public entities January 14, 2011 http://portal.jne.gob.pe/prensaypublicaciones/archivonoticias/Paginas/JEELIMACENTROABREINVESTIGACI%C3%93NCONTRADESPACHOPRESIDENCIALYCUATROENTIDADES.aspx

        JEE Lima Center conclude cases against President and five ministers January 21, 2011 http://portal.jne.gob.pe/prensaypublicaciones/archivonoticias/Paginas/JEELIMACENTRODAPORCONCLUIDOCASOSCONTRAPRESIDENTEYCINCOMINISTROS.aspx

        Consulta de Información electoral http://200.37.211.190/conjeejne/wf_BusquedaExpedientesJEE.aspx

        1. [other] Contraloría General de la República (National Audit Office) Informe de Gestión Enero – Diciembre 2011, page 69 August, 2012 http://www.contraloria.gob.pe/wps/portal/portalcgr/website/secciones/gestioninst/informes-gestionCGR/!ut/p/b1/pZTfToMwFIefZUQ078blx2QAp0rOKaTG8OFWUjc5oXx-W1JTJTF0yntFcn38Ts5PS3pyIF055jOPbvw-Xcv4bvTj2b3FmRAoOVMABl7eq6sndMNMIDTx6AX5aGibVufdX6qEtKIVWdXkb9jXnfAKBQSrOubM6pSjheP72pwFYfksjvgcQ326WuB8AxDeNwv0ABN8Zo1mZcHAqS0A76bIdvQcBMuKny9v6hwRgfsHwfEHVPN8DmKpbfP336FACyfR85PZHj9VSzf0VnzHwqclVJefkNj70j6SbIlcvwAhgR4xe8lTiwHhJ0D9IFgMiNdhNrAbfCRQQ60iR46igQLiLKOCHdVtcTik7bSfrgMM5bjr42LxCdstrtM!/dl4/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/

        Reviewer's sources: 1. [News article] Mayor of San Juan de Miraflores uses staff of the municipality and public infraestructure for his political campaign. Diario 16. September 27, 2014. http://diario16.pe/noticia/53147-alcalde-sjm-utiliza-personal-sede-municipio-para-campana 2. [News article] Susana Villarán made use of public resources to test acceptance of list of candidates. Diario Correo. September 26, 2014. http://diariocorreo.pe/ciudad/susana-villaran-uso-fondos-publicos-para-con-2907/ 3. [Press release] Ministry of Inclusion and the Ombudsman Office present results of campaign to prevent political abuse of social programs. MIDIS. November 21, 2014. http://www.midis.gob.pe/index.php/es/centro-de-informacion/1230-midis-y-defensoria-del-pueblo-presentan-resultados-de-campana-para-evitar-uso-politico-de-los-programas-sociales 4. [Webpage] Comptroller Office's campaign Postula con la Tuya: formal communications sent to National Electoral Jury regarding irregular use of state resources with political objectives: https://apps.contraloria.gob.pe/postulaconlatuya/oficios_remitidos.html

      • 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

        In law, political parties and individual candidates are granted free access to equitable air time during electoral campaigns.

        According to Article 37 of Political Parties Act “From thirty days to two days prior to general elections day, political parties have free access to, in accordance with the provisions of this law, private or state owned radio station or television, in authorized political campaign time slots (Franja Electoral in Spanish)."

        According to Article 38 ,“In every radio station and television political campaign slot time are between nineteen and twenty-two hours, with a duration of: Ten minutes a day between thirty and fifteen days prior to the election. Twenty minutes daily between fourteen days and six days before the election. Thirty minutes a day from five to two days before the election.

        Half of the total time available in media is distributed equally among all political parties with candidates participating in the electoral process. The other half is distributed proportionally to each political party based on the representation it has in Congress.”

        Political parties participating for the first time in an election have an equivalent time to the political party with the least time allocated.

        The ONPE (National Electoral Agency) is in charge of administration and distributribution of free slot time.

        According to Article 39 political parties and individual candidates are allowed to make their own purchases of airtime outside of these free public provisions, but only five minutes per day in each radio station and television from 60 days before the election.

        According to Article 16 of the Guidelines for the 2011 General Elections Political Campaign Time Slot, each political party must deliver to ONPE its material (video or radio spot) to be released in the Franja Electoral and allocate proportionally to its candidates in the Presidential Elections, Members of Congress, and representatives to the Andean Parliament.


        Peer reviewer comment: Disagree. Suggests a MODERATE score. There is no explicit legal obligation for parties to distribute the allocated time slots between its individual running candidates. The Political Parties Act establishes that air time for electoral campaigns is granted to political parties (article 37°). In the last modifications to the Directive on the Funding and Supervision of Political Parties Funds (National Electoral Agency) in order to extend the access to free air time to running parties for the regional elections of October 5, 2014, there is also no mention of individual candidates.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Articles 37, 38 and 39 http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Directorial N.° 031-2011-JNE Reglamento de Franja Electoral para las Elecciones Generales 2011 (Guidelines for 2011 General Elections Political Campaign Slot Time). Article 16. http://portal.jne.gob.pe/procesoselectorales/Documentos%20%20Procesos%20electorales/Elecciones%20Generales%202011/RES%200031-2011-JNE.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: ONPE. Resolución JefaturalN° 0132-2014-J/ONPE June 6, 2014. Modificaciones al Reglamento de Financiamiento y Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios http://elperuanolegal.blogspot.com/2014/06/resolucion-jefatural-n-0132-2014-jonpe.html

      • 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

        During the 2011 Elections, the President and members of Congress were elected on the same day. According to the newspapers and the National Electoral Agency (ONPE) Final Report, free time slots in radio and television station were distributed to political parties in accordance with the transparent and equitable mechanism defined in law.

        In total, 460 minutes were distributed before April 10 (Election Day) as mentioned below: 10 minutes per day (in total 160 minutes) between March 11 to March 26 (according to the law, “ten minutes a day between thirty and fifteen days prior to the election.”) 20 minutes per day (in total 180 minutes) between March 27 and April 4 (according to the law “twenty minutes daily between fourteen days and six days before the election”.) 60 minutes per day (in total 120 minutes) between April 5 and April 8 (according to the law “thirty minutes a day from five to two days before the election”.)

        ONPE raffled positions to free public campaign time slots on two occasions in February and April of 2011. The private radio station and television on which the slots were distributed were selected according statistical criteria (See Media Plan).

        According to Diana Chavez, ONPE distributes free time slots adequately. However, the parties themselves sometimes do not take advantage of these free timeslots due to their lack of resources to produce their own spots. That is why starting this year, sets and equipment from state television will be made available to the parties during electoral campaigns.

        There is no evidence, however, that parties distributed airtime proportionately to their candidates as prescribed by the regulations of 2011.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [news article] ONPE sorteó orden de la franja electoral (ONPE raffled positions in the free slot time), Peru21, February 18, 2011. http://peru21.pe/noticia/715632/onpe-sorteo-orden-franja-electoral
        3. [other] Resolución Jefatural N° 049-2011-J/ONPE Plan de Medios Franja Electoral (Media Plan - political campaign slot time) http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-049-2011.pdf Elecciones Generales y Parlamento Andino 2011, ONPE, December 2011 (Final Report of National Elections 2011), page 95 and 96. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modEscaparate/downloads/rpc-4-web_05102012.pdf
  • expand button!

    Contribution and Expenditure Restrictions

    More about category
    composite
    61
    • 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

        Article 31 of the Political Parties Act states that individual candidates (presidential and legislative) are not allowed to directly receive contributions of any kind, including cash. Political parties, however, can take in cash under certain conditions.

        According to Article 30 of the Political Parties Act, political parties "can receive resources from private funding, such as: a) The fees and cash contributions of its members. b) The products of the activities of the political party and the income from their own assets. In the case of amounts received from these financing activities, they may not exceed thirty tax units [approximately US$ 40,000] per year in the case that they cannot identify the contributors. "

        According to Article 32 of The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, “For cash contributions, an amount equal to or greater than the sum of three thousand five hundred soles (S/.3,500), or its equivalent in foreign currency [[approximately US$ 1,245]] , the contributor shall deliver such amount through any of the following means of payment: a. Deposit in a bank account with proper identification of the contributor. b. Check with the clause "not negotiable", "not transferable", “not bearer check" or equivalent issued under Article 190 of Law No. 27287, Securities Act. c. Giro, transfer funds, and money order. d. Debit and / or credit cards issued in the country.”

        According to Article 33 of The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, “Political parties can open one or more bank accounts…These accounts can only be operated by the Treasurer of the political party or the person to whom he delegates following the procedures established by the political party.”


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. Individual candidates are allowed to receive contributions only if the political party to whom they represent is fully informed. The same limitations that apply to political parties, apply to candidates. Article 31°: "[...] Individual candidates cannot receive direct contributions of any kind, excepting when the political party is informed and within the same limitations established in article 30 of this Act." The Directive on the Funding and Supervision of Political Parties Funds (article 39) establishes that contributions of any kind to individual candidates must be considered as contributions to the political party.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Articles 30, 31 and 32 http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Articles 32-33. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

        Reviewer's sources: Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 31. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 39. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

      • expand button!
        10
        Score
        NO
        In law, there is a ban on anonymous contributions.More about indicator

        Article 31 of the Political Parties Act states that individual candidates (presidential and legislative) are not allowed to directly receive contributions of any kind, including anonymous donations. Political parties, however, can receive anonymous donations under certain conditions.

        According to Article 30 of the Political Parties Act, political parties "can receive resources from private funding, such as: …b) The products of the activities of the political party and the income from their own assets. In the case of amounts received from these financing activities, they may not exceed thirty tax units [[approximately US$ 40,000]] per year in the case that cannot identify the contributors. "

        According to Article 32 of The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, “Also are prohibited anonymous contributions, except in cases of political parties activities and that do not exceed the maximum annual amount established in paragraph b) of article 30 of the Political Parties Act.” In other words, contributions generated from political party activities that are less than thirty tax units may be anonymous.

        (*) Tax Unit (Unidad Impositiva Tributaria – UIT)

        Reference value used in order to maintain constant values in the tax base, deductions, limits involvement and other aspects of taxes that the legislature deems appropriate standards. It can also be used to apply penalties, determine financial obligations and other formal. The value of the tax unit is determined annually by Supreme Decree. Source: Peruvian Central Bank

        UIT (2014) = Peruvian Nuevo Sol 3,800 = US$ 1,357


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. Article 31 allows individual candidates to receive contributions only if they inform their political party and with the same restrictions that apply to them established in article 30.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Articles 30, 31 and 32 http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 29. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

        Reviewer's sources: Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Articles 30, 31. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

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

        Article 31 of the Political Parties Act states that individual candidates (presidential and legislative) are not allowed to directly receive contributions of any kind, including in-kind donations. Political parties, however, can receive and must report in-kind donations.

        According to Article 30 of the Political Parties Act, political parties "can receive resources from private funding, such as: … … e) Legacies and, in general, any income in cash or in kind that they could get… ..Revenues from any of the sources set out in this article are recorded in the accounting books of the political party.”

        Further, by Article 39 of the Directive on the Financing and Supervision of Political Parties Funds, “Any contribution intended for any candidate, with resources from either candidate or third natural or legal persons, are considered contributions to a political party, with the same limits in Article 30 of the [Political Parties] Act and must be formally ackknowledged by the Treasurer, within a period not exceeding fifteen (15) calendar days from the date it was received." This means that even in-kind donations to candidates must be reported by their parties as contributions to the party, so all in-kind donations must be reported.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - Individual candidates must report donations of any kind that they receive to the political parties. Article 39 of the Directive on Funding and Supervision of Political Parties Funds establishes that candidates have up to 15 days to inform the political party about a donation received from the moment that he/she effectively receives it.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Articles 30, 31. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 39. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

        Reviewer's sources: Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 39. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

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

        Article 31 of the Political Parties Act states that individual candidates (presidential and legislative) are not allowed to directly receive contributions of any kind, including individual loans. Political parties, however, can receive and must report loans.

        According to Article 30 of the Political Parties Act, political parties "can receive resources from private funding, such as: … … e) Legacies and, in general, any income in cash or in kind that they could get… ..Revenues from any of the sources set out in this article are recorded in the accounting books of the political party.”

        Further, by Article 39 of the Directive on the Financing and Supervision of Political Parties Funds, “Any contribution intended for any candidate, with resources from either candidate or third natural or legal persons, are considered contributions to a political party, with the same limits in Article 30 of the [Political Parties] Act and must be formally ackknowledged by the Treasurer, within a period not exceeding fifteen (15) calendar days from the date it was received." This means that even loans to candidates must be reported by their parties as contributions to the party, so all loans must be reported.

        ONPE (National Electoral Agency) is in charge to oversight the contributions, including loans.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. If individual candidates receive loans, they have the obligation to report them to the political party.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Articles 30, 31. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 39. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

        Reviewer's sources: Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 39. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

    • 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

        According to Article 30 of the Political Parties Act, “To this end, the contributions from the same individual or corporation [to one political party] may not exceed, individually, sixty tax units per year” [approximately US$ 81,600].

        Further, according to Article 30 of the Directive on the Financing and Supervision of Political Parties Funds “A person, natural or legal, cannot make contributions to the same political party or its candidates, if the total amount is greater than sixty (60) tax units [[approximately US$ 81,600]] on an annual budget exercise. Contribution means donations or other form or type of transaction which transferred to the political organization assets, rights, services or cash.”

        Individual candidates (presidential and legislative) are not allowed to receive contributions from individuals. Any contribution made to a candidate is considered a contribution to political party.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

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

        According to Article 30 of the Political Parties Act, “To this end, the contributions from the same individual or legal entity [to one political party] may not exceed, individually, sixty tax units per year” [approximately US$ 81,600].

        Further, according to Article 30 of the Directive on the Financing and Supervision of Political Parties Funds “A person, natural or legal, cannot make contributions to the same political party or its candidates, if the total amount is greater than sixty (60) tax units [[approximately US$ 81,600]] on an annual budget exercise. Contribution means donations or other form or type of transaction which transferred to the political organization assets, rights, services or cash.”

        Individual candidates (presidential and legislative) are not allowed to receive contributions from corporations. Any contribution made to a candidate is considered a contribution to political party.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. Individual candidates are allowed to receive donations from corporations. Article 39 of the Directive on Finance and Supervision of Political Parties Funds makes it explicit, but as mentioned before, any donation to candidates is considered donation to the political party and must be reported.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

        Reviewer's sources: Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 39. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

      • expand button!
        15
        Score
        NO
        In law, contributions from foreign sources are banned.More about indicator

        According to Article 31 of the Political Parties Act, political parties may not receive contributions from “Political parties and agencies of foreign governments, except where the contributions are intended for education, training and research. However, contributions from foreign individuals and/or companies are not restricted by law, meaning that political parties can legally receive donations from such figures.

        Individual candidates are not allowed to receive contributions of any type, and this includes donations from foreign sources. Any contribution to a candidate must be considered a contribution to a political party.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. Individual candidates can receive this kind of contributions, but they must report in a given period of time. Besides that, article 38 of the Directive on Funding and Supervision of Political Parties Fund adds that this kind of contributions should have all documentation and registrations needed to identify fully the donor.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 31. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Reviewer's sources: Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Articles 38, 39. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

      • 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

        Peruvian law defines legal persons as corporations, associations, think tanks and any other nonprofit actors.

        Individual candidate (presidential or legislative) are not allowed to receive contributions of any kind, and this includes donations from third party actors. Any contribution to an individual must be considered a contribution to the political party of which that candidate is a member.

        According to Article 30 of the Political Parties Act, contributions from third party actors to parties are restricted: “To this end, the contributions from the same individual or legal person may not exceed, individually, sixty tax units per year," [approximately US$ 81,600].

        According to Article 30 of The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds “A person, natural or legal, cannot make contributions to the same political party or its candidates, if the total amount is greater than sixty (60) tax units [[approximately US$ 81,600]] on an annual budget exercise. Contribution means donations, contributions or other form or type of transaction which transferred to the political organization assets, rights, services or cash."

        (*) Tax Unit (Unidad Impositiva Tributaria – UIT)

        Reference value used in order to maintain constant values in the tax base, deductions, limits involvement and other aspects of taxes that the legislature deems appropriate standards. It can also be used to apply penalties, determine financial obligations and other formal. The value of the tax unit is determined annually by Supreme Decree. Source: Peruvian Central Bank

        UIT (2014) = Peruvian Nuevo Sol 3,800 = US$ 1,357


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - as the researcher indicates, individual candidates must report any contributions they receive from third party actors to their political party.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

        Reviewer's sources: Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

      • expand button!
        17
        Score
        NO
        In law, election campaign spending by political parties and individual candidates is limited to a maximum amount.More about indicator

        No such law exists. Electoral spending is not limited to a maximum amount. Only limits on the period in which electoral advertising is permitted are defined in law.

        According to Article 40 of the Political Parties Act, “The advertising contracted for electoral purposes is permitted from sixty until two days before an election. In the case of a general election, the political party is unable to advertise for longer than five minutes a day on every radio station and television. Advertising must only be contracted by the Treasurer of the political party”.

        Individual candidates (presidential and legislative) are not allowed to contract advertising during political campaigns; all advertising must be conducted by parties.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 39-41. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 56. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

      • 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

        According to Article 30 of Political Parties Act, political finance regulations enumerated in that law apply to both national and sub-national elections.

        According to Diana Chavez, political parties and movements of sub-regional scope are also subject to the Political Parties Act and must provide regular information on financing. In practice, however, Chavez said that political parties and movements in sub-national elections rarely comply, and regularly fail to present financial information in a timely manner per the requirements of the Political Parties Act. The main sanction for failing to present required financial reports is the cancellation of direct funding. In practice, though, this sanction is never enforced, and as such, does not persuade offenders to comply with the requirements of the Political Parties Act.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - Peru has aproximately 1800 sub-national units: 25 regional governments and municipalities (195 provinces and 1647 districts). Sub-national elections were held on October 5, 2014 (with a second round in 14 regional governments held on December 7). Political finance regulations do apply to this elections as well, but there are some differences regarding the free air time allocated for political parties: only parties running for regional government (president, vice-president and members of the regional Council) receive the benefit according to the modifications to the Directive on Finance and Supervision of Political Parties Funds introduced in 2014.

        Scoring Criteria

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [website] ONPE web site – Verification and control of political parties funds. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/verificacion-control-fondos-partidarios.html
        3. [other] Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Reviewer's sources: ONPE. Resolución JefaturalN° 0132-2014-J/ONPE June 6, 2014. Modificaciones al Reglamento de Financiamiento y Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios http://elperuanolegal.blogspot.com/2014/06/resolucion-jefatural-n-0132-2014-jonpe.html

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

        According to Diana Chavez, the predominant sources of funding for electoral campaigns are (i) candidates self-contribution to the political party; (ii) contributions from other individuals, and (iii) political parties activities in which they collect funds from a broad group of individuals.

        Samuel Rotta and Alfredo Torres agree that some candidates / political parties obtain funds from illegal contributors (drugs or illegal mining) but this is too difficult to prove. In general, some candidates / political parties obtain contribution from citizens - organized or not - by promising a future benefit in terms of change of legal framework or public investment (basic public services). Some contributions are given to the candidates or candidates' advisor directly and they have the obligations to report it to the political party. In regards to this last issue, it is not clear if all such contributions are reported.

        In June 2014, some persons associated with illegal mining - mining entrepreneurs and small mining firms that work without adhering to all legal requirements, including enviromental regulations - announced that they contributed millions to Ollanta Humala's party before and during 2011 campaign, with the purpose that Humala and his party might help them to regularize their situation through new legal framework to small mining firms. The contributions were given to Humala's advisor but it were not registered.

        If these amounts were effectively delivered and not declared to National Electoral Agency (ONPE), according to the law, Humala's political party should have been sanctioned. However, no sanctions have been imposed yet because there are no investigations open.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - As the researcher points out, there is an ongoing investigation into the case of allegedly illegal donations from miners to Gana Perú: Daniel Abugattás, a leader of the party, is being investigated by the Attorney General (Fiscalía de la Nación). Since the investigation is classified, no more information is available at present.

        Scoring Criteria

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. [Interview] Alfredo Torres, CEO, Ipsos Peru, July 22, 2014
        4. "Fiscalía inició investigación sobre presuntos aportes de minería ilegal (Prosecutor initiated an investigation into alleged illegal mining contributions)," RPP, June 17, 2014. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2014-06-11-mineros-informales-anuncian-pruebas-que-confirman-aportes-noticia_699311.html

        Reviewer's sources: [News article] Fiscalía investiga a Abugattás por enriquecimiento ilícito. RPP. October 15, 2014. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2014-10-15-fiscalia-investiga-a-daniel-abugattas-por-enriquecimiento-ilicito-noticia_733794.html

      • 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

        "According to Diana Chavez and Samuel Rotta, few actions have been taken by the National Electoral Body - ONPE in order to punish political parties who violate the rules on financing.

        This is because (i) the ONPE has a small team to conduct the audit and control; (ii) the ONPE has no jurisdiction to conduct financial audits on political parties; and (iii) the political party can appeal the decisions issued by ONPE in other administrative and judicial bodies.

        Although ONPE have imposed fines in the past , there is no evidence that these have been collected or have generated improvements in the compliance by political parties. For example, Alianza para el Progreso political party has been sanctioned three times with fines because it has received contributions above the maximun allowed. Fines have been imposed but have not been effectively implemented because Alianza para el Progreso has appealed the ONPE decision to the Judicial Court."


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - There is a widespread assumption among experts that political parties do not report all contributions nor all the expenditures they make in the campaigns. In an interview with Perú.21, the former Head of the ONPE's Supervision of Political Parties Funds Office, Carlos Reyna, estimated that a national campaign could cost at minimum S/. 12 million in mass advertisement, but political parties only reported between 3 and 4 million as the whole in the general elections of 2011. A more recent example is that during the last sub-national elections (October 5, 2014), the Electoral Agency (ONPE) conducted an independent audit of the expenses of the political parties running for the municipality of Lima (the capital of the country). The study showed that the winning party, Solidaridad Nacional, spent approximately S/. 6 million, but in their official reports to ONPE, the party declared that only received contributions for less than S/. 200,000.

        Scoring Criteria

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. Fines imposed by National Electoral Agency – ONPE: -- RJ-205-2011 Sancionar al partido político Perú Posible con una multa ascendente a ciento setenta y un mil doscientos cincuenta nuevos soles (S/. 171,250.00), suma que equivale a diez veces el monto de la contribución recibida en exceso, por los fundamentos expuestos en la parte considerativa de la presente resolución [[Fine imposed to Peru Posible political party amounting to US$ 61,161 for violation of contribution limits]], October 28, 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-205-2011.pdf --RJ-160-2011 Sancionar el partido político "Alianza para el Progreso" con una multa ascendente a Dos Millones Doscientos Sesenta y Siete Mil CUatrocientos Cuarenta y 00/00 Nuevos soles (S/. 2 267 440.00), suma que equivale a diez veces el monto de la contribución recibida en exceso de parte de la Universidad Cesar Vallejo S.A.C durante el año 2010. [[Fine imposed to Alianza para el Progreso political party amounting to US$ 809,800 for violation of contribution limits]], August 31, 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-160-2011.pdf --RJ-107-2012 Sancionar al partido político "Alianza para el Progreso" con una multa ascendiente a Nueve millones Trescientos Noventa y Cinco Mil Cuatrocientos Cuarenta y 00/100 Nuevos Soles (S/9'395,440.00), suma que equivale a diez veces el monto de contribución recibida en exceso de parte de la Universidad César Vallejo S.A.C. durante el año 2010. [[Fine imposed to Alianza para el Progreso political party amounting to US$ 3,355,514 for violation of contribution limits – RJ -160 – 2011 was appealed in the National Electoral Jury]], July 2, 2012. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-107-2012.pdf --RJ-160-2013 Sancionar al partido político "Alianza para el Progreso" con una multa ascendente a Nueve Millones Trescientos Noventa y Cinco Mil Cuatrocientos Cuarenta y 00/100 Nuevos Soles (S/. 9´395,440.00), suma que equivale a diez veces el monto de la contribución recibida en exceso de parte de la Universidad César Vallejo S.A.C. durante el año 2010. [[Fine imposed to Alianza para el Progreso political party amounting to US$ 3,355,514 for violation of contribution limits – RJ -107 – 2012 was appealed in the National Electoral Jury]], August 21, 2013. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-160-2013.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: 1. [News article] Political expenditure do not match with reality. Perú.21. February 15, 2011. http://peru21.pe/noticia/713961/gastos-campana-no-se- 2. [News article] Solidaridad Nacional shows the biggest gap in their campaign expenses. La República. October 16, 2014. http://www.larepublica.pe/16-10-2014/solidaridad-nacional-tiene-el-mayor-desfase-en-gastos-de-su-campana

  • expand button!

    Reporting and Public Disclosure

    More about category
    composite
    56
    • 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

        Political parties are required to report itemized contributions and expenditures to the oversight authority, both during and outside electoral campaign periods. Contributions and expenditures of/to individual candidates (presidential and legislative) must be reported as part of their party's spending and donations.

        According to Article 34 of the Political Parties Act, political parties must to present a financial report “within the period of six (6) months from the close of each fiscal year”. In addition, may require political parties that “submit a list of the contributions referred to in Article 30, which contains the amount of each contribution and, if applicable, the names and addresses of the persons who have made it”.

        According to Article 67 of the Directive on the Financing of Political Parties and Supervision Funds, political parties present the following financial information in their annual reports:

        Balance Sheet with details of the composition of each of their accounts. Statement of revenue and expenditure, differentiating between private and public sources of funding. Notes to the financial statements. Further information to the financial statements.

        According to Article 71 of the Directive on the Financing and Funds Supervision of Political Parties, "Political parties are obliged to submit bimonthly reports of contributions received and expenditures made ??during the election campaign, after the call to the respective electoral process." The reports must be submitted within seven (7) days following the expiration of two months corresponding whichever mind the provisions of Articles 32 (income and cash contributions), Article 35 (contribution in kind) and Article 39 (grants and contributions from candidates themselves).


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. Contributions to individual candidates, as well as their expenditures, are considered funds of the political parties, as explained above. Therefore, in the itemized reports to the oversight authority, both during electoral campaigns and periodically, those funds must be included. Formats issued by ONPE for the different electoral processes provide guidance to do an itemized fulfillment. This is clear from the fourth report of the Alianza para el Progreso during the 2014 subnational elections.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 34. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Articles 67, 68, 69, 70 and 71. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

        Reviewer's sources: [Excel sheet] 4th Report of contributions and expenditures by Alianza para el Progreso political party during electoral sub-national campaign (15 October, 2014): http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/home/modFondosPartidarios/downloads/ERM-2014/PP/APP.pdf Includes itemized information by the party and by candidates to the regional presidency, vice-presidency and regional council.

      • expand button!
        22
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political parties and individual candidates are required to report their financial information on a monthly basis during the electoral campaign.More about indicator

        Political parties must report bimonthly their financial information to the oversight authority during the electoral campaign. Contributions and expenditures of individual candidates (presidential and legislative) are considered political party resources, and must be included in party reports.

        According to Article 71 of the Directive on the Financing and Supervision of Political Parties Funds, “Political parties are required to submit bimonthly reports of contributions received and expenditures made during the election campaign...”.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 34. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 71. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

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

        According to Article 70 of the Directive on the Financing and Supervision of Political Parties Funds, parties must submit "a statement of the income received from legal private sources" to the ONPE every six months. In addition to this requirement, Article 67 of the same directive mandates that parties present their financial information annually in accordance with article 34 of the Political Parties Act. This information must include a general balance sheet, the state of spending and income, notes on the financial state of the party, and complementary information. Finally, Article 30 of the Political Parties Act specifies that parties may be required to "submit a list of the contributions referred to in Article 30," which would contain the amount of each contribution and, if applicable, the names and addresses of the persons who made them.

        As stipulated by Article 54 contributions to and expenditures of individual candidates during campaigns (presidential and legislative) must be included in party reports.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 34. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Articles 54, 67-71. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

      • expand button!
        24
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent do political parties and individual candidates report itemized financial information monthly?More about indicator

        According to Diana Chavez, the National Electoral Body – ONPE has a small team to conduct audits and control on political parties. In addition, there are not incentives to deliver detailed information on time. During the 2011 elections, most of the political parties did not present financial information on time or completed.

        According to RPP, most important broadcasting firm in Peru, in 2011, 15 from 27 of political parties delivered financial information on time, according to the Political Parties Act and regulation.

        ONPE website has a section dedicated to financial information reports, but not all political parties deliver complete information on time.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014

        2. [news article] "ONPE: Solo 15 de 27 partidos entregaron información financiera de 2010 (ONPE: Only 15 of 27 political parties delivered financial information 2010)," RPP. July 1, 2011. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2011-07-01-onpe-solo-15-de-27-partidos-entregaron-informacion-financiera-de-2010-noticia_380993.html

        3. [other] Información Financiera presentada por las Organizaciones Políticas, Elecciones Generales y Parlamento Andino 2011, ONPE website, 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/organizacion_listado.php

      • expand button!
        25
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent do financial reports by political parties and individual candidates include all types of contributions?More about indicator

        According to Diana Chavez, the National Electoral Body – ONPE requires the use of forms to deliver information about contributions, but most of the political parties do not, in practice, present detailed information about (i) main individual contributors (natural or juridical persons); or (ii) funds from political parties promotion activities (e.g meetings).

        According to the Peru21 newspaper, the financial reports delivered by Gana Peru (political party of Ollanta Humala) did not deliver complete and detailed information about contributions.

        In particular, as Peru21 mentions and can be seen in the ONPE reports, there are significant amounts from promotional activities that are not detailed or individualized in the Gana Peru reports.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. The most relevant problem is the low rate of reports delivered to ONPE. During the sub-national elections held on October 2014, only 64 out of more than 300 political organizations (24%) delivered their reports by the deadline to present the 4th report. Among those that present their reports, some parties do fail to present detailed information, like Gana Perú in the general elections of 2011, but some others do fulfill the reports according to the itemized format required by ONPE (for example, the APP, as shown in the link below). The problem is with the quality of the data reported and the un-reported donations.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

        A 0 score is earned where neither condition is met.

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014

        2. [news article] "¿Quién financia a Ollanta Humala? (Who funds Ollanta Humala?)" Perú 21. March 30, 2011. http://peru21.pe/noticia/735120/quien-que-financia-ollanta-humala

        3. [other] Información Financiera presentada por las Organizaciones Políticas, Elecciones Generales y Parlamento Andino 2011, ONPE website. 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/organizacion_listado.php

        Gana Peru financial information http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/ARCHIVOS/PORORGANIZACION/GANAPERU/ingresos1.pdf http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/ARCHIVOS/PORORGANIZACION/GANAPERU/ingresos2.pdf http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/ARCHIVOS/PORORGANIZACION/GANAPERU/ingresos3.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: [News article] 64 out of 300 political organizations reported their campaign expenditures. RPP. October 20, 2014. http://www.rpp.com.pe/2014-10-20-onpe-64-de-300-agrupaciones-politicas-presentaron-gastos-de-campana-noticia_735317.html

        [Excel sheet] 4th Report of contributions and expenditures by Alianza para el Progreso political party during electoral sub-national campaign (15 October, 2014): http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/home/modFondosPartidarios/downloads/ERM-2014/PP/APP.pdf Includes itemized information by the party and by candidates to the regional presidency, vice-presidency and regional council.

    • expand button!
      Availability of Electoral Campaigns' Financial Information to the Public
      More about category
      • expand button!
        26
        Score
        YES
        In law, financial information from political parties and individual candidates must be available to the public.More about indicator

        Financial information from political parties must be available to the public, as must the financial information of candidates (presidential and legislative), which is reported as part of their parties' financial reports.

        According to Article 34 of the Political Parties Act, “…External verification and control of economic and financial activity of political parties, movements of regional or departmental level, and the political organizations of provincial and district level correspond exclusively to the National Electoral Agency (ONPE)."

        According to Article 77 of the Directive on the Financing and Supervision of Political Parties Funds, “Publication of the reports.- Once the process of verification and control concludes, ONPE will make financial reports available to the public. It delivers approved reports on the ONPE website in the most appropriate formats for convenient access.”

        In addition, according to Article 11 of Transparency and Access to Public Information Law, all organizations of the public administration must deliver information within 7 days of request; if circumstances make it unusually difficult to gather the requested information, that term may be extended an additional 5 working days.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 34. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Articles 77, 78. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

        Name: Law 27806 Transparency and Access to Public Information Law, 2002. Article 11. http://www.peru.gob.pe/normas/docs/LEY_27806.pdf

      • expand button!
        27
        Score
        25
        In practice, to what extent can citizens easily access the financial information of all political parties and individual candidates?More about indicator

        According to Diana Chavez, the National Electoral Body – citizens can easily access the financial information of some political parties and individual candidates through the ONPE website, but not all political parties or individuals submit the legally required information, and as a result, not all party financial information is made publicly available.

        Unfortunately, the information is not presented in open data source, which does not allow the making of comparisons or is linked to Jurado Nacional de Elecciones (National Electoral Jury) data. Financial reports are published in in scanned copies turned into pdf format, and are not machine readable.

        In addition, according to Samuel Rotta, citizens can access to information by an information request form, but he considers that there are not enough incentives to use the information.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014

        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014

        3. [other] Información Financiera presentada por las Organizaciones Políticas, Elecciones Generales y Parlamento Andino 2011, ONPE website. 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/organizacion_listado.php

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

        According to Diana Chavez, the National Electoral Body – ONPE publishes information in a standardized format, but not all political parties or individuals present information their financial information, meaning that not all parties and candidates are covered in the publicly available data.

        Finally, according to Diana Chavez and Samuel Rotta, the information is presented using terms and forms that are not easily to understand by non experts.

        The available standardized information from ONPE includes: Balance Sheet with details of the composition of each of their accounts. Statement of revenue and expenditure, differentiating between private and public sources of funding. Notes to the financial statements. Further information to the financial statements.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014

        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014

        3. [other] Información Financiera presentada por las Organizaciones Políticas, Elecciones Generales y Parlamento Andino 2011, ONPE website. 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/organizacion_listado.php

      • expand button!
        29
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent do mainstream journalism media outlets use political finance data in their reporting?More about indicator

        According to Samuel Rotta, it is not common that journalism media outlets use official political finance data in their reporting.

        The main obstacles to the use of data by journalist are (i) the data is presented using terms and formats that are not easily understood and compared by laymen; and (ii) journalist usually regard officially published information as lacking completeness, and missing main resources that are sometimes not declared by parties and candidates.

        Although one media used official data in their reporting (see Peru 21 research), it is not a general practice by other media outlets.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética, July 22, 2014

        2. [news article] "¿Quién financia a Ollanta Humala? (Who funds Ollanta Humala?)" Perú 21. March 30, 2011. http://peru21.pe/noticia/735120/quien-que-financia-ollanta-humala

        3. [other] Información Financiera presentada por las Organizaciones Políticas, Elecciones Generales y Parlamento Andino 2011, ONPE website. 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/organizacion_listado.php

        Gana Peru financial information http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/ARCHIVOS/PORORGANIZACION/GANAPERU/ingresos1.pdf http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/ARCHIVOS/PORORGANIZACION/GANAPERU/ingresos2.pdf http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/ARCHIVOS/PORORGANIZACION/GANAPERU/ingresos3.pdf

      • 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

        There were frequent news reports or other documented incidents of violation or abuse of political finance laws during the 2011 elections.

        According to Alfredo Torres, although there are laws to regulate the financing of political parties and specific reports for transparent contributions by private contributors, in practice many candidates and political parties receive contributions which are not reported and are then investigated by the press. In particular, there is evidence that there are contributions from drug trafficking, groups, and companies with special interests, as the media report it.

        For example, in the article of Fabiola Torres, it is described that the APRA (one of the longest running political parties) was unable to explain who had donated a million peruvian soles (three hundred thousand US dollars) reported in its financial report.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Alfredo Torres, CEO, Ipsos Peru, July 22, 2014

        2. [News articles] Fabiola Torres Lopez, "Los mecenas de los candidatos [[Patrons of candidates]]," El Comercio. January 22, 2011. http://e.elcomercio.pe/66/doc/0/0/2/8/1/281398.pdf

        "ONPE multó a partido Alianza para el Progreso por más de 2 millones de soles [[ONPE fined Alianza para el Progreso political party for more than 2 million soles]]," La República. August 28, 2011. http://www.larepublica.pe/28-08-2011/onpe-multo-partido-alianza-para-el-progreso-por-mas-de-2-millones-de-soles

        Javier Soto, "En la mira dinero de Camargo Correa a campaña de Toledo," La Primera. February 15, 2011. http://www.diariolaprimeraperu.com/online/politica/en-la-mira-dinero-de-camargo-correa-a-campana-de-toledo_79984.html

        "¿Quién financia a Ollanta Humala? (Who funds Ollanta Humala?)" Perú 21. March 30, 2011. http://peru21.pe/noticia/735120/quien-que-financia-ollanta-humala

      • expand button!
        31
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent were there no news reports or other documented incidents of vote-buying?More about indicator

        All interviewees agree that there were no evidence of vote buying – as it is defined in this study - during the General Election of 2011.

        The three interviewees believe that the main reason is that vote buying occurs mainly in elections of regional or municipal governments, when "votos golondrinos" are produced. This is a practice in which a group of voters massively change their place of residence in order to benefit a candidate.

        In general, candidates and political parties often sell future promises (investment, labor, etc.) to attract voters in their favor, instead of buying votes with cash.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. In the last general elections (2011), vote-buying hardly took place, as the researcher mentioned. But during the last elections in the country, sub-nationals of October 2014, different reports related to electoral offenses circulated widely both at national and local level related to vote-buying. In the previous months to the start of the campaign, it was released a video in which César Acuña, a political leader from the north, well known also as owner of private universities, was openly buying political loyalties in a public demonstration for his re-election as Mayor of Trujillo in the campaign of 2010. In the video he even recognized that what he was doing was wrong, but he did not care since in politics, everything is allowed. At the end, he was not only re-elected in 2010 but in 2014 he won the regional presidency of La Libertad.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. [Interview] Alfredo Torres, CEO, Ipsos Peru, July 22, 2014

        Reviewer's sources: 1. [News article] Waldo Ríos proposal to give S/. 500 as a way to get votes. El Comercio. October 27, 2014. http://elcomercio.pe/peru/ancash/waldo-rios-propuso-entregar-s-500-solo-captar-votos-noticia-1766931 2. [News article] Gifts make complicate the situation of Oscorima. Diario Correo. August 29, 2014. http://diariocorreo.pe/historico/regalos-ponen-en-jaque-a-oscorima-8974/ 3. [News article] César Acuña conducted a strategy to buy votes for his re-election in Truillo. América TV. May 16, 2013. http://www.americatv.com.pe/noticias/actualidad/cesar-acuna-dispuso-una-estrategia-para-comprar-votos-para-la-reeleccion-en-trujillo-n108671

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

        According to Diana Chavez and Samuel Rotta, officially published financial information is used by civil society organizations with limitations.

        The main obstacle is that the data is not presented in an open format. Instaed, all financial reports are published as .pdf, which limits the extent to which systematic comparisons can be easily made.

        Sources report that only la Asociación Civil Transparencia has used the official data. However, due to website updates, direct information on their advocacy campaign carried out during the 2011 elections is no longer available.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014

        3. [other] Información Financiera presentada por las Organizaciones Políticas, Elecciones Generales y Parlamento Andino 2011, ONPE website. 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modFondosPartidarios/gsfp2011/organizacion_listado.php

        4. Asociación Civil Transparencia (2011 work on political finance no longer available online) www.transparencia.org.pe

      • 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

        The current Political Parties Act was decree in 2003, after 10 years of a dictatorial regime and a weak electoral system. Most of the political parties and civil society organizations were in agreement with the law. But during subsequent years, evidence of the opacity of political party funds and the weak institutionalization of political parties, lent weight to the necessity of changes in the law.

        In 2013, ten years after the adoption of the Political Parties Act, and in an improving economic environment, the National Elections Jury, the National Electoral Agency, and the National Identity Register, all entities that are part of Peruvian Electoral System, have promoted a new Political Parties Act. This bill is currently in the hands of Congress. Its primary provisions include the annulment of the Third Transitory Provision that links public funds for political parties to the state of the national budget.

        The new Political Parties Act, promoted also by la Asociación Civil Transparencia and other civil society organizations, includes reforms regarding the disbursal of public funds, surveillance tools and powers, and sanctions. The civil society organizations agree that the new law will create better incentives for transparency in the funding of political parties and generate better conditions for the institutionalization of political parties.

        According to Alfredo Torres, Ipsos Peru CEO - the most important survey company - it is exceedingly unlikely that Congress will actually approve the proposed law because political parties and congress do not have the confidence of the public, and the approving the new law would have negative consequences for their image (It might seem that Congress is passing a law to appropriate public money, without assurances that will be used to strengthen capacities in the parties themselves).


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - The reform Bill proposed by the Electoral System institutions is supported openly by Asociación Civil Transparencia, International IDEA and National Democratic Institute (NDI). It is the first bill that is visible, well known, and seen as legitimate. Despite the coherence of the proposal, the discussion within the Congress is most likely ending up in the approval of partial reforms if not different specific reforms. As an example, a bill to ban the re-election of regional presidents was approved by the Congress recently as an answer to corruption scandals that emerged in the past months. But the proposal did not take into consideration the possible impact on the system, it was mainly reactive, as experts like Fernando Tuesta think.

        Scoring Criteria

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014

        2. [Interview] Alfredo Torres, CEO, Ipsos Apoyo, July 22, 2014

        3. [other] Explanatory Memorandum – Draft of New Political Parties Act, 2013. http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/tradocestproc/Expvirt_2011.nsf/visbusqptramdoc/03060?opendocument

        Reviewer's sources: 1.[News article] Congress passed a law prohibitting the re-election of regional presidents and mayors. El Comercio. October 23, 2014. http://elcomercio.pe/politica/congreso/aprueban-prohibir-reeleccion-inmediata-presidentes-region-noticia-1766161

        2.[Blog post] Tuesta, Fernando. Should it be approved the prohibition of re-election of regional presidents? November 6, 2014. http://blog.pucp.edu.pe/fernandotuesta/%C2%BFse-debe-aprobar-la-no-reeleccion-de-presidentes-regionales

  • expand button!

    Third Party Actors

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

        No such law exists.

        According to Article 30 of the Political Parties Act, political parties are allowed to receive private funds from third-parties actors, and must report such contributions to ONPE, but there are no such obligations for third-parties actors.

        There are not acts or regulations in order to supervise third-parties actors activities directly.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Article 30. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

      • 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

        Third-party actors never report itemized contributions received or expenditures. Other than the limit on third party direct contributions, there are not regulations for third-party actors' accountability.

        Interviewees agree that third party actors regulation is not a priority, when the major concern is the monitoring of the financing of political parties.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. [Interview] Alfredo Torres, CEO, Ipsos Peru, July 22, 2014
      • 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

        Third-party actors never report itemized contributions received or expenditures. Other than the limit on third party contributions, there are not regulations for third-party actors' accountability.

        Interviewees agree that the regulation of third party actors is not a priority, when the major concern is the monitoring of the financing of political parties.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. [Interview] Alfredo Torres, CEO, Ipsos Peru, July 22, 2014
      • 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

        Third-party actors never report itemized contributions received or expenditures, and such information is not publicly available.

        Interviewers agree that there are informal and unregulated third party actors that help individuals candidates and political parties obtain contributions. For example, in the news story “Ollanta Humala sí recibió apoyo de mineros informales” (Ollanta Humala did receive support from informal miners) tells how an informal miners group supported Ollanta Humala during his 2011 campaign. The group collected money from individuals and gave it to a member of Gana Peru, Humala's political party. There are not books or a registry of these contributions and how were they obtained.

        There is no formal evidence that a union or association has made propaganda for a political party or candidate.

        There is no way to check what unions or associations are supporting a political party or candidate, unless it is declared by the own political party in their financial reports

        Interviewees agree that third party actors regulation is not a priority, when the major concern is the monitoring of the financing of political parties.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - Although there is little evidence of third-party actors investing by themselves in support of candidates, there is a point where they seem to coincide: the performance of mass media. This was evident during the general elections of 2011, when right-wing oriented TV stations and newspapers turn into a political front where interests of big companies and business associations converged to attack the leftist candidate Humala. This usage of media was not reported at all.

        Scoring Criteria

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. [Interview] Alfredo Torres, CEO, Ipsos Peru, July 22, 2014

        4. [News story] Title: Mario Mejía Huaraca, "Ollanta Humala sí recibió apoyo de mineros informales (Ollanta Humala did receive support from informal miners)," El Comercio. June 10, 2014. http://elcomercio.pe/politica/gobierno/ollanta-humala-si-recibio-apoyo-mineros-ilegales-noticia-1735230?ref=notapolitica&ft=modleatambien&e=titulo

        Reviewer's sources: [News article] There is a mass-media coalition against Humala. La República. May 5, 2011. http://www.larepublica.pe/05-05-2011/se-ha-formado-un-frente-mediatico-contra-humala-0

  • expand button!

    Monitoring and Enforcement

    More about category
    composite
    61
    • expand button!
      Monitoring Capabilities
      More about category
      • expand button!
        38
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political finance information is monitored by an independent oversight authority.More about indicator

        The ONPE (National Electoral Authority) is an independent oversight authority is mandated to monitor political finance information, and it has the power to request, monitor and verify information, especifically investigate irregularities in the financial reports submitted by parties. It does not, however, have total power to audit political party funds and verify, for example, laundering from drug trafficking or other illegal activity.

        According to Article 177 of Constitution, the ONPE is an autonomous body of the State, that oversees the electoral system of Peru.

        In addition, according to Article 34 of Political Parties Act, “The power to exert external verification and audits of economic and financial activity of political parties, movements of regional or departmental level, and political organizations province-wide and district belongs exclusively to National Electoral Authority (ONPE)." ONPE is an administrative fiscalization body, but not have powers to open for example bank account information to verify laundering from drug trafficking or other illegal activities.


        Peer reviewer comment: Disagree. Suggests a YES score. In law, ONPE is invested with powers to investigate and audit the political finance information reported by political parties. What is not explicit with the normative is whether the ONPE should report or not, and how, to other public watchdogs such as Attorney General when there are suspicions on money laundering or other illegal activities as mentioned by the researcher. The Political Parties Act and the Directive on Finance and Supervision of Political Parties Funds focus on the administrative sanctions, not mentioning criminal offences.

        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

        Constitution of Peru, 1993. Article 177. http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/relatagenda/constitucion.nsf/constitucion/2C01D945BB12755B0525672A0055768A?opendocument

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 34. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Reviewer's sources: Directive on Finance and Supervision of Political Parties Funds. Resolución Jefatural 060-2005-J/ONPE. Articles 72 to 76. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/home/modFinanzasPartidarias/RFSFP-2012.pdf

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

        High-level appointments must be based on merit in a public appointment process; and appointees must be free of conflicts of interest due to personal loyalties, family connections, political party affiliations, business partners or other biases.

        The Consejo Nacional de la Magistratura [[National Judicial Council]] is an independent and autonomous body, whose members are elected by universities (elect 2 members), professional associations (elect 2 members) and judicial power (elect 2 members). According to Article 6 of the Organic Law of the National Judicial Council, members of a political party are prohibited from being elected as member of the Council.

        According to Article 8 of the Organic Law of the National Judicial Council, the role of member of the Council is full-time. Directors are prohibited from holding any other public or private office or practice any profession or occupation, except for university teaching. It is a serious reason to hold office, accept, carry out or facilitates meetings or communications with applicants for the positions that the Council is responsible for appoint.

        According to Article 182 of Constitution, The Head of the National Electoral Agency is appointed by the Consejo Nacional de la Magistratura [[National Judicial Council]] for a renewable period of four years.

        The Directive for Public Appointment to Head of the National Electoral Agency clearly defined requirements and specific aspects of selection based on merit, and procedures to include citizen participation in the process, including the right to veto candidates.

        Article 3 of the Directive describes the following merit requiremens: "a) To be a Peruvian citizen, b) hold a professional title issued by a university according to the Universities Act, c) demonstrate proved professional experience in management and information technologies, d) demonstrate a personal history free from allegations or scandals, e) to be in full control of his/her physical and mental capacities, f) not fall in any of the impediments established in the Constitution or the laws, g) not have been dismissed from the public administration nor from the private activity for serious offenses.

        In the same way, Article 9 to 11 of the Law 26487 Organic Law of the National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE) provides that cannot be members of ONPE, who are members of a political party. ONPE public officials work full-time, are prohibited from holding any other public or private office or practice any profession or occupation, except for university teaching.

        Lastly, also regarding the conflicts of interest, the Code of Ethics of the Public Servant Act makes explicit that any official, including members of the ONPE, should be free of all conflicts of interest. Article 7 related to the duties states: "1. Neutrality. All public servants should act absolutely free from political, economic or other kind of interest when performing their public functions, and should show independence from their relations with individuals, political parties or institutions." And article 8 related to the prohibitions: "1. Conflicts of interests. All public servants are prohibited to keep relations or to accept situations in which their personal, laboral, economic or financial could collide with the accomplishment of the tasks and duties of their position."

        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

        Constitution of Peru, 1993. Article 182. http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/relatagenda/constitucion.nsf/485982b35f1f749705256a730080e6f9/304c23fcba09bd260525672a0055b6d0?OpenDocument

        Ley Nº 26397 – Ley Orgánica del Consejo Nacional de la Magistratura (Nacional Judicial Council Act of Creation), 1994. Article 6 and 8 http://www.cnm.gob.pe/webcnm/archivos/pdf/2011/marcolegal/Ley%20Organica/Ley26397+LEY+ORGANICA+CNM.pdf

        Ley N. 26487 Ley Orgánica de la Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales, 1995. Article 9 to 11, 16 http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/organizacionyfuncionesdeoe/leyorganicajne_26487.html

        Resolución Nº 485 -2004-CNM Reglamento de Concurso para el Nombramiento del Jefe de la Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales (Directive for Public Appointment of National Electoral Agency Chief). 2004. link: http://www.cnm.gob.pe/webcnm/archivos/pdf/2008/gsn/reglanombraONPE.pdf

        Resolución N° 319-2012-CNM Modificatoria del Reglamento de Concurso para el Nombramiento del Jefe de la Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales (Modifications of Directive for Public Appointment of National Electoral Agency Chief). 2012. http://www.cnm.gob.pe/webcnm/archivos/pdf/2012/sn/reglamentoonpecnm.pdf

        Codigo de Etica del Consejo Nacional de la Magistratura (Ethic Codes), 2012. Article 12, Concursos (public appointment process) and Conflictos de Interés (Conflict of Interest), 2012. http://www.cnm.gob.pe/webcnm/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35%3Acodigo-de-etica&catid=17%3Ainformacion-institucional&Itemid=123

        Codigo de Etica de la Función Pública. Law 27815. 2002. Articles 7 and 8. http://www.pcm.gob.pe/InformacionGral/etica/Ley27815.pdf

      • expand button!
        40
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent are high-level appointments to the oversight authority based on merit?More about indicator

        According to interviewers, the election of the Chief of the National Authority of Election (ONPE) was developed in an advertised competition and public vetting process and the candidate with the most merit and without conflicts of interest or other biases were appointed.

        The information of the public appointment process is available in the website of Consejo Nacional de la Magistratura (National Judicial Council).

        No news reports questioning the appointment or the work of the National Judicial Council in the appointment process were found.

        In addition, recruitment of ONPE personnel is done by ONPE as established by the Organic Act and publicized through the website.

        No news reports questioning the appointment or the work of ONPE in the appointment of their personnel process were found.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014

        3. Information on the public appointment of the ONPE chief, "Concurso público para la selección y nombramiento del Jefe de la oficina nacional de procesos electorales," ONPE, 2012. http://www.cnm.gob.pe/webcnm/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2342:convocatoria-no-003-2012-sncnm&catid=40:seleccion-y-nombramiento&Itemid=92

        4. ONPE public information for selection of personnel, accessed on August 1, 2014. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/convocatorias.html

        5. [News story] "Mariano Cucho es el nuevo jefe de la ONPE (Mariano Cucho es the new Chief of ONPE)," La República. January 16, 2013. http://www.larepublica.pe/16-01-2013/mariano-cucho-espinoza-es-el-nuevo-jefe-de-la-onpe

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

        The appointees have the authority or mandate to review cases and issue decisions, the law establishes security of tenure, and removal or disciplinary actions are based on due process conducted by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        According to Article 182 of the Constitution, “The Head of the National Electoral Agency is appointed by the Consejo Nacional de la Magistratura [[National Judicial Council]] for a renewable period of four years. It can be removed by the Consejo for misconduct.”

        According to Article 1 of Ley 26487, the National Electoral Agency is an independent and autonomous body.

        According to Article 8 of Ley 26487, the Chief of National Electoral Agency can be removed only by the National Judicial Council for committing serious misconduct (when the acts compromise the dignity of the office or detract the public concept).

        According to Article 11, paragraph l) of Resolución Jefatural No 063-2014-J, the Chief of ONPE, previous report of Gerencia de Supervisión de Fondos Paritdarios, can punish the political parties with the loss of rights, or the implementation of a fine, which is proven it has incurred faults provided by law.

        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

        Constitution of Peru, 1993. Article 182. http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/relatagenda/constitucion.nsf/485982b35f1f749705256a730080e6f9/304c23fcba09bd260525672a0055b6d0?OpenDocument

        Ley 26487 Ley Orgánica de la Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales, 1995. Articles 1, 8-15. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/organizacionyfuncionesdeoe/leyorganicajne_26487.html

        Resolución Jefatural Nº 063-2014-J/ONPE, Reglamento de Organización y Funciones de la Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales. 2014. Article 11(1). http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/organizacionyfuncionesdeoe/leyorganicajne_26487.html

      • expand button!
        42
        Score
        100
        In practice, to what extent is the independence of high-level appointees guaranteed?More about indicator

        Interviewees agree that Chief of ONPE (National Electoral Agency) reviews cases and issues decisions without fear or favor from other branches of government; he is granted security of tenure, and no Chief has been removed, disciplined or transferred without due process by the National Judicial Council.

        Despite this, interviewees recognized that the power of Chief of ONPE is limited because the Political Parties law does not give the institution much power to impose sanctions. ONPE can initiate investigation and issue decisions but it is not strong enough to dissuade parties from engaging in bad practices.

        Interviewees agree that Gerencia de Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios has credibility and independence, but not enough staff to fulfill all their supervisory functions.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. There is a case when a Head on ONPE was removed: José Portillo Campbell, amidst the scandal of political fraud by the former president, Alberto Fujimori, in the general elections of 2000. Campbell was disciplined by the National Judicial Council (Consejo Nacional de la Magistratura) and removed from his position. After that sanction, criminal investigations followed and Mr. Portillo ended up in jail for electoral fraud. Note that this case occurred well outside the study period.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014

        3. [News story] Jorge Loayza, "Mariano Cucho: “La ONPE es rigurosa con la fiscalización de aportes” [[ONPE is rigorously with oversight of contributions]],": La República. April 27, 2014. http://www.larepublica.pe/27-04-2014/la-onpe-es-rigurosa-con-la-fiscalizacion-de-aportes

        Reviewer's sources: [News article] José Portillo is now in jail. La República. July 26, 2001. http://www.larepublica.pe/26-07-2001/por-avalar-inscripcion-de-peru-2000-con-un-millon-de-firmas-falsificadas-jose-portillo-ya

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

        The Gerencia de Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios de la ONPE [[division in charge of Political Party Funds supervision in the National Electoral Agency]] aims to conduct the verification and external auditing of the economic and financial activity of political parties. It is also responsible for determining the advertising time available for each political party during electoral campaigns, and the corresponding allocation of space on radio and television in non-election periods. Additionally, the ONPE has the right to issue regulations to ensure compliance with verification and audits.

        The Gerencia consists of a Manager, a Chief of Regulations and a Chief of Verification. In addition, the Gerencia has 7 to 10 assistants. The Manager has the power to start verifications process and report them to the Head of ONPE in order to issue recommendations and sanctions. The verifications process are predictable according to clearly defined standards.

        Decisions of the Gerencia are related to the issuance of reports on the measures for verification and control performed on the financial information submitted by political organizations. The Gerencia also makes proposals to the Head of ONPE, if applicable, regarding the imposition of sanctions to political parties for not complying with what the law states.

        No complaints arguing to politicized decisions have been presented by political parties in the past.

        Interviewees agree that the Gerencia is a technical body with systematized tools but not enough personnel to accomplish all its functions.


        Peer reviewer comment: There is no evidence of politically driven decisions by the Finance and Supervision of Political Parties Funds Office (Gerencia), nor even allegations of such influence. The case of Portillo Campbell, used an example above occured almost a decade and a half ago.

        Scoring Criteria

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014

        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014

        3. News story Fabiola Torres Lopez, "Los mecenas de los candidatos [[Patrons of candidates]]," El Comercio. January 22, 2011. http://e.elcomercio.pe/66/doc/0/0/2/8/1/281398.pdf

        4. Gerencia de Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios - ONPE - Website Link: http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/supervision-fondos-partidarios.html

        ONPE Organization Chart Link: http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modDescargas/Organigrama2014.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: [News article] José Portillo is now in jail. La República. July 26, 2001. http://www.larepublica.pe/26-07-2001/por-avalar-inscripcion-de-peru-2000-con-un-millon-de-firmas-falsificadas-jose-portillo-ya

      • expand button!
        44
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the authority have sufficient capacity to monitor political finance regulations?More about indicator

        Interviewees agree that ONPE can't fulfill most of its essential functions due to budget constraints. Its budget is not sufficient to finance a complete staff.

        According to the ONPE website, the Gerencia de Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios has only four permanent civil servants. The rest of the personnel (7 to 10) are hired under temporary contracts and the turnover is high.

        But the most important issue for the interviewees is that the ONPE does not have enough powers of sactions in case of political parties' law violations.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014

        3. News story Fabiola Torres Lopez, "Los mecenas de los candidatos [[Patrons of candidates]]," El Comercio. January 22, 2011. http://e.elcomercio.pe/66/doc/0/0/2/8/1/281398.pdf

        4. ONPE website, Personnel and ONPE budget, February 2014. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-050-2014.pdf

      • expand button!
        45
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the authority conduct investigations or audits when necessary?More about indicator

        According to Diana Chavez and Samuel Rotta the National Electoral Authority (ONPE) didn't conduct any investigations or full audits during the most recent electoral campaign.

        This is because the ONPE has no jurisdiction to account and conduct full and complete financial audits on political parties. ONPE can only ask for financial information and support documentation according to regulations. For example ONPE can not require banks to disclose information about the bank accounts of political parties - movements, etc. Nor can the ONPE conduct a full audit of all invoices that document all income and expenses.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. Gerencia de Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios - ONPE - Website http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/supervision-fondos-partidarios.html
      • expand button!
        46
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the authority publish the results of investigations or audits?More about indicator

        According to Diana Chavez and Samuel Rotta the National Electoral Authority (ONPE) didn't conduct any investigations or full audits during the most recent electoral campaign.

        As stated above, this is because the ONPE has no jurisdiction to account and conduct full and complete financial audits on political parties. ONPE can only ask for financial information and support documentation according to regulations. For example ONPE can not require banks to disclose information about the bank accounts of political parties - movements, etc. Nor can the ONPE conduct a full audit of all invoices that document all income and expenses.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. Gerencia de Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios - ONPE - Website, accessed on August 1, 2014. Link: http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/supervision-fondos-partidarios.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 Political Parties Act and regulations clearly defines violations of political finance laws and sanctions for specific violations.

        Article 36 of the Political Parties Act defines violations and sanctions for (i) not delivering the required financial information; (ii) when the political party receives prohibited contributions or the financial information has been omitted or adulterated; and (iii) when the political party receives individual or anonymous contributions over the maximum amount approved.

        According to Article 79 of the Directive on the Political Parties Financing and Funds Supervision, the sanction for political parties in case of failure to submit annual financial information is the loss of the right to direct public funding.

        According to Article 80 of the same Directive, the sanction for political parties in case of receiving forbidden funding, omission or adulteration in accounting is a fine not less than ten (10) or more than fifty (50) times the amount of the contribution received, missed or adulterated.

        According to Article 81 of the Directive, the sanction for political parties in case of receiving funding above the legally permissible limit is a fine not less than ten (10) nor more than thirty (30) times the amount of the contribution received.

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 36. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Articles 79-96. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

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

        The National Electoral Authority has the power to impose administrative sanctions, and prosecute violators through the judicial system.

        According to Article 36 of the Political Parties Act and Articles 85 to 96, the National Electoral Authority (ONPE) has the power to impose sanctions and can directly prosecute violators.

        It is important to mention, that ONPE only impose administrative sanctions itself (fines) and send cases to public prosecution (enforced collection of a fine ordered by a court).

        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

        Law No. 28094 Political Parties Act, 2003. Article 36. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/LeydePartidosPoliticos_1.html#arriba

        Resolución Jefatural N.° 060-2005-J/ONPE The Directive on the Financing and Supervisionof Political Parties Funds, 2005. Articles 85-96. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modCompendio/html/partidos%20politicos/ReglamFinanYSuperFondPartidariosTitulos.html

      • expand button!
        49
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent do offenders comply with sanctions imposed?More about indicator

        According to Diana Chavez and Samuel Rotta, few actions have been taken by National Electoral Body - ONPE in order to punish political parties who violate the rules on financing. Even when officially sanctioned, offenders rarely comply with the sanctions imposed.

        For example, political party Alianza para el Progreso was sanctioned in 2011 because it recieved contributions above the maximum allowed, but the party has not complied with sanctions, having failed to pay the imposed fine.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. There are two relevant things to dicuss. First, political parties that fail to deliver their financial reports should be sanctioned with the suspension of direct public funding. But, as seen before, this kind of funding has never been implemented, therefore the sanctioning is completely useless. The problem here is not if parties comply with sanctions imposed, but if sanctions are discouraging enough.

        Second, political parties which exceed the limits set for the contributions should be fined, but evidence suggests that they do not comply. In a public statement in August 2014, ONPE was complaining that Perú Posible and Alianza para el Progreso did not pay their fines imposed on 2011.

        Scoring Criteria

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

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

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014
        3. Fines imposed by National Electoral Agency – ONPE --RJ-160-2011 Sancionar el partido político "Alianza para el Progreso" con una multa ascendente a Dos Millones Doscientos Sesenta y Siete Mil CUatrocientos Cuarenta y 00/00 Nuevos soles (S/. 2 267 440.00), suma que equivale a diez veces el monto de la contribución recibida en exceso de parte de la Universidad Cesar Vallejo S.A.C durante el año 2010. [[Fine imposed to Alianza para el Progreso political party amounting to US$ 809,800 for violation of contribution limits]]. August 31, 2011. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-160-2011.pdf --RJ-107-2012 Sancionar al partido político "Alianza para el Progreso" con una multa ascendiente a Nueve millones Trescientos Noventa y Cinco Mil Cuatrocientos Cuarenta y 00/100 Nuevos Soles (S/9'395,440.00), suma que equivale a diez veces el monto de contribución recibida en exceso de parte de la Universidad César Vallejo S.A.C. durante el año 2010. [[Fine imposed to Alianza para el Progreso political party amounting to US$ 3,355,514 for violation of contribution limits – RJ -160 – 2011 was appealed in the National Electoral Jury]]. July 2, 2012. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-107-2012.pdf --RJ-160-2013 Sancionar al partido político "Alianza para el Progreso" con una multa ascendente a Nueve Millones Trescientos Noventa y Cinco Mil Cuatrocientos Cuarenta y 00/100 Nuevos Soles (S/. 9´395,440.00), suma que equivale a diez veces el monto de la contribución recibida en exceso de parte de la Universidad César Vallejo S.A.C. durante el año 2010. [[Fine imposed to Alianza para el Progreso political party amounting to US$ 3,355,514 for violation of contribution limits – RJ -107 – 2012 was appealed in the National Electoral Jury]]. August 21, 2013. http://www.web.onpe.gob.pe/modResoluciones/descargas/RJ-160-2013.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: [News article] ONPE: Political party of César Acuña owes 9 million soles in fines. El Comercio. August 8, 2014. http://elcomercio.pe/politica/partidos/onpe-partido-acuna-mas-s9-millones-multas-noticia-1748604

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

        Interviewees agree that the current Political Parties Act and complementary regulations don't providesufficient tools to ensure effective enforcement of political finance laws.

        There are only two main sanctions to political parties: (i) fines; and (ii) restrictions to access to public funds. In practices, fines are not paid by the political parties and also there are not ways to oversee individual candidates. In addition, although the Political Parties Act was decreed in 2005, no public funds have been distributed to political parties. Therefore, no sanction related to restrictions of public funds has been imposed.

        The most important three issues to be faced to improve effectiveness of enforcement are: (i) Improve the typification of infractions and sanctions that the National Electoral Authority (ONPE) can impose regarding the control of political parties funds. (ii) Define the sanctions for individual candidates that do not declare contributions or contracts directly and not by the political party treasurer. (iii) Improve the capacity of ONPE to make effective the fines imposed to the political parties.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - According to what has been discussed above, the most relevant conditions that prevent a proper enforcement of political finance regulations are: i) a weak sanctioning framework, ii) limited resources of ONPE to oversee a big universe of political parties, and iii) lack of legal teeth to enforce the sanctions actually imposed over parties.

        Accordingly, the most urgent measures to be taken should be: i) to strenghten the sanctions to include the possiblity to cancel the inscription of the political party, ii) to extend the human and economic resources of the Finance and Supervision Office so they are able to actually audit the veracity of the information in the reports. This could include the possibility to cross information with databases owned by the Tax Authority, the Public Register, the Comptroller Office and other institutions, and iii) to give ONPE the competence to enforce the collection of fines. Most of these recommendations are included in the Political Parties reform bill sent by the Electoral System institutions to the Congress.

        Scoring Criteria

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

        Sources
        1. [Interview] Diana Chavez, Researcher, Asociación Civil Transparencia, July 22, 2014
        2. [Interview] Samuel Rotta, Researcher, Proética (International Transparency Chapter), July 22, 2014

        3. News story Ghiovani Hinojosa, "¿Quién pone la plata? [[Who gives the money?]]," La República, January 22, 2011. http://www.larepublica.pe/21-03-2010/quien-pone-la-plata

        4. [other] Explanatory Memorandum – Draft of New Political Parties Act, 2013. http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/tradocestproc/Expvirt_2011.nsf/visbusqptramdoc/03060?opendocument

        Reviewer's sources: [other] Explanatory Memorandum – Draft of New Political Parties Act, 2013. http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/tradocestproc/Expvirt_2011.nsf/visbusqptramdoc/03060?opendocument

Constitutionally, the Peruvian electoral system consists of three public entities who are responsible for planning, organizing and implementing any election held in the country. These institutions are: National Elections Jury (Jurado Nacional de Elecciones), National Electoral Agency (Organismo Nacional de Procesos Electorales) and National Identity Register (Registro Nacional de Identidad y Estado Civil). There are two big kind of elections in Peru: i) general elections (President, two Vice-Presidents and Members of Parliament), which occur every five years and ii) sub-national elections (near 2000 descentralized jurisdictions in regions and municipalities) which take place every four years. Peru has a unicameral legislature and a directly elected President. If no presidential candidates receives at least half of the valid votes in the first round of voting, a second round is held within 30 days. The top two candidates in terms of vote count participate in the second round of voting. Candidates run on party tickets, and campaign funds are largely managed by political parties. In fact, only parties are legally permitted to receive and administer funds. Presidents may not serve more than one term consecutively.

The 130 members of the Congress are elected in 25 multimember districts. Seats are distributed across each district proportional to the population, and candidates are elected on the basis of a closed list proportional representation system. Independent candidates are allowed to run as long as they are included as part of a registered political party. Campaign funds are typically managed by parties, as by law, all funds must be received and managed by parties rather than candidates.

The most recent general elections in Peru were held in April 2011. After the second round in May Gana Perú (51.4%) defeated Fuerza 2011 (48.5%) and Ollanta Humala was elected as President. Both parties won significant number of seats in Congress: Gana Perú won 47 out of 130, Fuerza 2011 won 37. Perú Posible, a political ally of Gana Perú won 21 seats. The rest were split into three minor representations.