Candidates should disclose campaign spending before elections – PPCRV

MANILA, Philippines — An official of the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV) has pushed the idea of requiring political candidates to submit reports on their campaign contributions and spending prior to election day.

Arwin Serrano, PPCRV voter education director, proposed legislation requiring candidates to submit their statement of contributions and expenses or SOCE before the start of the campaign period and a month before the elections.

These reports should be aside from the current requirement of SOCE submission 30 days after election day.

“We could propose reforms. If our legislators are really intent to improve on our campaign finance, then let us revive the practice of requiring candidates to file a report before the official campaign period and to give another report a month before the election and not just 30 days after the election,” Serrano told “The Chiefs” on One News channel Thursday evening.

At present, candidates are only mandated by law to submit their SOCEs 30 days after election. This only covers the official campaign period and does not reflect the real data of their expenses and contributions prior to campaigning.

Some candidates start their campaign early and release ads even before the start of the campaign period.

For the last national and local elections, those running for national positions were given 90 days to campaign from Feb. 8 to May 7. Those aspiring for local positions had 45 days to campaign from March 25 to May 7.

The deadline for filing the SOCE was last June 8.

“A candidate has an obligation to report what he spent from what he received. But the problem is we would never know the companies or personalities who actually donated or the amount because, on both sides, they would never divulge that information. We really wanted to return to the previous law in terms of campaign finance – that they have to report before election day and not after election day,” Serrano said.

Karol Ilagan, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) content head, implied that the data privacy law should not be used to hide information like the name of the donor and the amount of money donated.

She said the idea that the Data Privacy Act prohibits the disclosure of names of campaign contributors is a misconception since the parties are already taking part in an election.

“I think it is a common misconception. Even the Data Privacy Commission already made a statement about this in relation to SALN (statement of assets, liabilities and net worth). Our Data Privacy Law was not created to make it difficult for us to gather public information. So when we talk about campaign donation, while it might be on a personal level because it is coming from a private person, but you are participating in a public electoral exercise so it should be made known to the public,” Ilagan stressed.

She added that some personal information – such as the signature and identification number of a person – may be redacted in the document.

“But this should not stop us from knowing how much was their donation,” Ilagan said.

Tighter auditing

To promote transparency and help voters know their candidates more, Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian has proposed tighter auditing for the campaign spending of those who run for public office.

Gatchalian made the call after the PCIJ reported its findings on the top spenders among presidential, vice presidential and senatorial candidates in the last elections.

He found the figures presented by the PCIJ, which used data from Nielsen Ad Intel, as being “too high” as he noted that nearly all radio, TV, print and online media outfits give discounts and free airtime.

“There are many models mentioned by politicians and experts, like for example our government spending, financing the campaign so that there is equal footing among candidates who have the capability (to spend) and those who have not,” Gatchalian told The Chiefs when asked about campaign finance reform.

“But the reality is it’s very difficult for the government to spend meaningful amounts for a candidate to campaign,” he said.

The best way forward is to improve regulation of campaign spending, “making sure that the documents submitted (to the Commission on Elections) are authentic and validated,” he said, referring to the SOCE provided by candidates to the poll body after elections.

He admitted monitoring campaign ads and promotions in social media platforms is difficult.

Gatchalian, however, believes the SOCE remains to be the more accurate record of a candidate’s campaign expenditures as his or her declarations can be cross-checked with concerned media agencies and other advertising outfits.

The senator said part of the issue on the perceived excessive candidates’ spending is the campaign period, where the regulation of such expenses is covered under election laws.

He noted the Supreme Court has ruled that there is legally no such thing as “premature campaigning,” which the public perceives when a possible candidate promotes himself or herself in media and social media platforms before the official start of the campaign period.

“There is a very thin line between telling the public what you have done and campaigning. The only difference are the words ‘vote for me’,” Gatchalian said.

He added that all politicians, including himself, see the need to inform their constituents of what they have accomplished and what they can do in the next term if elected. –  Paolo Romero