In the following interview, Professor of the National University of Mongolia, PhD D.Bumdari speaks about the bill on political parties, which is under preparation for submission. She participated in the bill discussion as a researcher. 

The public demands political parties to be accountable and ethical. So how does the new bill on political parties address the issue of accountability? Should the structure of political parties and their accountability be regulated by law?

Under the current law, there is an oversight committee within a party organization. This committee, together with the party’s code of conduct, address issues of ethics. In particular, political parties deal with ethical and other conflicts through their own party rules and oversight committees. It is believed that the issue of liability can be resolved through regulations on funding for political parties. In accordance with the bill, parties will report on whether it is implementing state funding appropriately. On the other hand, political parties have a social responsibility. The bill reflected the issue of accountability for monitoring compliance with that obligation. Since ethical issues cannot be resolved directly by law, parties must reflect them in their rules. This means that they are responsible for demanding accountability themselves.

The Law on Political Parties and Law on Financing of Political Party are being consolidated into a single law. How is the funding issue reflected in the bill?

The bill stipulates that financial reports must be accurate and categorized, and reflects that parties must accurately report on state funding. Parliament should accept the provision of the bill that will fully support the development of a multi-party system. In particular, the bill provides for monetary and non-monetary support for political parties. It states that monetary support can be provided to parties that have won seats in Parliament, and non-monetary support will be provided to small parties with financial problems. For instance, if a party cannot afford to rent an office, the government will provide an office. If this regulation is approved, the government will be able to support small parties by providing free television advertising or free postal services. In this way, other parties will develop and become stronger. If these provisions are passed, representative democracy will be preserved.

Are there any restrictions on the internal organization of parties in the bill?

It is difficult to impose restrictions on the internal organization of parties. So, ideologically or philosophically, of course, the law must state that parties have to operate in accordance with the Constitution or that they must respect pluralism and human rights. The law also can prohibit parties from supporting fascist ideology or the act against the national interests of the country. The right to association and freedom of expression is guaranteed by law. Therefore, if a party does not violate the Constitution and other related laws, the party’s rule can regulate its internal organization.

The constitutional amendment stipulates that in order to form a party, at least 1 percent of Mongolia’s citizens of voting age must unite. Some researchers view that it will restrict the right to associate. Should such a limit be included in the law?

This provision will come into force in 2028. It states that at least 1 percent of citizens of the voting age must support a party to allow it to be formed. It means that if this provision is currently in effect, more than 200,000 people must support the party. Those people will be considered as supporting members. So I don’t think it is necessary to collect 20,000 signatures to form a party. In accordance with the bill, 801 signatures will be collected because the constitutional amendment on party membership will be implemented from 2028. Therefore, if a meeting to found a party is held after collecting 801 signatures, it will have met one requirement for the party registration.

There is no choice but to criticize this constitutional amendment for restricting the right to association. This is because even 20 people can unite and form a party. In general, any number of people have the right to unite or associate. Ensuring the right to association is the basis for a diverse pluralistic society. Therefore, it is inappropriate to impose strict restrictions on this. I agree that a more lenient limit should be set.

There are 35 parties registered with the Supreme Court. Some people criticize that there are too many parties in Mongolia. What is your position on this issue?

The existence of many parties is a sign of pluralism in society. In other words, if there are many parties and they are active, pluralism exists. Most importantly, the bill on political parties includes an issue of whether a party operates continuously. This will be included in the monitoring system. Although there are 35 parties in Mongolia, there is only one opposition in Parliament. This means that the other parties are weak. On one hand, the state must support and intensify the activities of political parties. Pluralists have to compete with each other. Moreover, a party itself must be committed to its goals. The new bill should include regulations to dissolve parties that do not achieve their goals. There is no need to worry about having many parties.

Under the current law, political parties are registered by the Supreme Court. The bill states that the central election authority will be responsible for party registration, control and accountability. Do you think this is the right arrangement?

Party registration and control must be regulated in accordance with the law. If the central election authority is in charge of registration, parties should be registered based on basic requirements. The authority can decide whether to register a party by examining the basic requirements for parties (collecting 801 signatures, holding a meeting to form a party, having a flag and logo, and developing rules). In this case, it is not necessary to register parties by court. I think it would be better if the Supreme Court decides party control and liquidation.

Are there any conflicting provisions?

In general, I think the bill can significantly update the current law. It reflected the recommendations of researchers. However, I don’t know how the bill will be discussed at the decision-making level. To date, there have been discussions on the bill. The bill addresses issues such as state funding, political party registration, liquidation, gender equality, and party accountability, which are necessary for the development of modern political parties. I think that this bill fully reflected the views of researchers.

What are some of the key provisions in this bill?

The Law on Political Parties has not changed since 2005. The bill stipulates that parties must be a party of policy. A party of policy is a party with an action plan. In fact, all parties have action plans. However, since an action plan can be state policy, parties must become institutions capable of developing and implementing it. The bill provides for the establishment of a policy research institute or policy-making committee within a party. It will be possible to stop incompetent people from being elected to Parliament thanks to political parties. In accordance with the bill, candidates will compete by presenting their action plans only. One of the main goals of the bill is to turn parties into institutions that compete only via their policies.

Does that mean the bill can address the issue of distributing money or items to citizens to buy votes?

It is true that some politicians distribute money or items to citizens to buy votes by taking advantage of legal loopholes. Simply put, some candidates or politicians say that they will be “guardians” of the people if they are elected to Parliament. In our country, the people think that lawmakers provide jobs, take care of citizens, and address all problems in their constituencies. Parliamentarians should talk about policies and those policies should sort out issues of the country. If a party of policy can be formed, this issue can be stopped by law.

Currently, the opposition is weak and unable to control the authorities. One of the disturbances caused by this problem is the Bogd Zonkhova Lama project. Is this situation related to the electoral system? What electoral system do you think is suitable for Mongolia?

Yes, this can be explained by the electoral system. Researchers all agree that a mixed electoral system is compatible with Mongolia. In fact, the constitutional amendment prohibits lawmakers from transferring money directly to their constituencies or making any changes to the state budget developed by the government. The issue of not changing the amount of budget money submitted by the government has been included in the bill. However, this does not preclude them from influencing the budget in any other way.

Lawmakers project money into the state budget for their constituencies. This is the disadvantage of the majoritarian system. In this case, the government may lobby lawmakers to approve the state budget. Lawmakers must control the budget.

The Democratic Party is one of Mongolia’s largest political parties. However, due to its internal divisions, the party is unable to fulfill its role as an opposition in Parliament. What is your position on this party’s issue?

I am not a member of the party, so I can only look at the issue from the outside. At first, I thought it was an internal conflict and that they are arguing for office. However, when I review this long-running dispute, I see that there is a big interest behind it. I view that there are several interests within the party and other interests from third parties that are influencing it. If it is not resolved, it could be negative for the ruling party too. In this case, the opposition of the ruling party will be the people. The people are not able to see daily political activities or review laws. There is also a risk of misunderstanding in society. If another opposition party in addition to the Democratic Party is in Parliament, they can present the real situation to the people. Therefore, it is important to develop a multi-party system. Other political parties need to become more competent. If parties do not fulfill their responsibilities, it can have a negative impact on Mongolia’s independence and the existence of the country. It is considered that a multi-party system is existent if there are at least three or four parties in Parliament.