Dentro do tema mais amplo do financiamento político, os objetivos desta tese são explicar o surgimento, a disseminação e os efeitos do financiamento público de partidos e campanhas eleitorais. Um dos principais achados desta tese é a constatação de que o modelo de financiamento político varia em função do sistema eleitoral. Em países com sistemas majoritários há uma tendência à adoção de financiamento exclusivamente privado; por outro lado, é possível dizer que o financiamento público é uma característica dos países com sistemas proporcionais, tamanha a sua predominância nesses países no início do século XXI. Além disso, o tipo de financiamento público também varia de acordo com o sistema eleitoral: em sistemas proporcionais é mais presente um tipo de financiamento público que utiliza critérios alocativos baseados no tempo passado, que tende a propiciar uma perpetuação do status quo ante partidário. Em sistemas majoritários, ao contrário, quando existe financiamento público, geralmente são utilizados critérios alocativos baseados no tempo presente, cujo efeito sobre a competição eleitoral é menos pronunciado. Esses achados sustentam a hipótese de que o financiamento público é adotado em sistemas proporcionais como instrumento de restrição do mercado eleitoral em benefício dos partidos mais estabelecidos. / Within the ample theme of political finance, this dissertation aims to explain the emergence, dissemination and the effects of public or state financing of political parties and campaigns. One of the main findings of this dissertation is that models of political financing vary according to electoral systems. In majoritarian system countries there is a tendency towards the adoption of a purely private model of political financing, whereas it can be said that public financing is a feature of proportional system countries given its prevalence in such countries in early 21st century. Furthermore, types of public financing also vary according to electoral systems: proportional countries tend to utilize allocation criteria on the basis of a previous moment, leading to a perpetuation of the party system status quo ante. When there is public financing in majoritarian countries, the allocation criteria are usually based on present time, which has a less pronounced effect on electoral competition. These findings support the hypothesis that public financing is adopted in proportional countries as an instrument to achieve a restrictive effect on the electoral market, benefiting more established parties.

This thesis compares the public policies of campaign finance in Canada with those in the U.S. and the U.K. in the period 2000-2011. The majority of the Canadian literature on party finance demonstrates a belief in the efficacy and necessity of the enterprise. This dissertation suspends this disposition and offers a critical approach to the regulation of money in Canadian elections. This thesis situates the discussion of party finance regulation in the context of contending models of democracy. Campaign finance rule changes are conceptualized within a new institutionalist framework. Changes in campaign finance rules are seen as changes in incentives and are seen to work in configurations, that is, interacting with existing formal and informal constraints. New institutionalism provides the avenue of inquiry into the position of political parties on the boundary of the public and private spheres and how campaign finance regulation may shift that boundary. This thesis adopts a mixed-method approach, incorporating the results of 65 semi-structured interviews with academics and political practitioners with primary document research. This thesis demonstrates that campaign finance rule changes interact with other electoral rules, types of parties and the nation’s historic institutions. The need to meld Quebec’s statist and civil-code traditions with Westminster democratic traditions, the introduction of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the role of subsequent court decisions, and the role of Elections Canada in its political finance oversight capacity, constitute major catalysts for Canadian party finance rule changes and for understanding the impact of rule changes. Contrary to the majority of literature on campaign finance reform, this thesis demonstrates that there may be diminishing marginal returns to additional campaign finance regulations, at least in a mature democracy such as Canada. Campaign finance rules reveal preferences for different models of democracy. As such, they must be carefully monitored.

This thesis compares the public policies of campaign finance in Canada with those in the U.S. and the U.K. in the period 2000-2011. The majority of the Canadian literature on party finance demonstrates a belief in the efficacy and necessity of the enterprise. This dissertation suspends this disposition and offers a critical approach to the regulation of money in Canadian elections. This thesis situates the discussion of party finance regulation in the context of contending models of democracy. Campaign finance rule changes are conceptualized within a new institutionalist framework. Changes in campaign finance rules are seen as changes in incentives and are seen to work in configurations, that is, interacting with existing formal and informal constraints. New institutionalism provides the avenue of inquiry into the position of political parties on the boundary of the public and private spheres and how campaign finance regulation may shift that boundary. This thesis adopts a mixed-method approach, incorporating the results of 65 semi-structured interviews with academics and political practitioners with primary document research. This thesis demonstrates that campaign finance rule changes interact with other electoral rules, types of parties and the nation’s historic institutions. The need to meld Quebec’s statist and civil-code traditions with Westminster democratic traditions, the introduction of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the role of subsequent court decisions, and the role of Elections Canada in its political finance oversight capacity, constitute major catalysts for Canadian party finance rule changes and for understanding the impact of rule changes. Contrary to the majority of literature on campaign finance reform, this thesis demonstrates that there may be diminishing marginal returns to additional campaign finance regulations, at least in a mature democracy such as Canada. Campaign finance rules reveal preferences for different models of democracy. As such, they must be carefully monitored.

Despite the fact that the issue has been discussed for several decades, there are still no rules in Sweden mandating political parties and candidates to disclose received donations. Because of this lack of transparency, Sweden is not fulfilling some of its international obligations and has fallen behind in the international trend to increase the transparency of election campaign finance. The lack of disclosure rules in Sweden has led to extensive criticism, most notably from the Council of Europe´s group of states against corruption, Greco, who criticized Sweden in light of the guidelines on the subject from the Council of Europe. At this writing, a new proposal for disclosure rules is being prepared at the Department of Justice, DoJ. The proposal is to be presented in spring 2013. For the time being, the only thing that exists regarding transparency of election finance in Sweden is an agreement from 2000, struck between some of the parties in parliament, to voluntarily disclose some of their received donations. In 2004 a government report proposed implementing disclosure rules. The proposal received extensive criticism from the reviewing bodies regarding its compliance with the rights protection in the Swedish Instrument of Government, RF. RF provides absolute protection against the government forcing individuals to disclose their opinions in political matters and absolute protection against the government keeping records of individuals' political opinions. Since these rights are absolute, they can be restricted only by constitutional amendment. It is uncertain if disclosure rules can be considered infringements under these absolute provisions, but even if they are considered infringements, it is likely that the disclosure provisions can be designed so as not to violate the RF absolute protections. Furthermore, RF provides relative protection of the freedom of expression and association. Disclosure rules would probably not infringe the freedom of expression but are likely to be considered infringements of the freedom of association. Restrictions of the freedom of association can only be implemented in the order specified in RF and since the order for restricting the freedom of association is very rigid, it is unlikely that such a restriction would be allowed under the current RF. The DoJ has expressed that the pending proposal will not include a proposal for a constitutional amendment. For Sweden to fulfill its international obligations in regards of transparency in campaign finance, more extensive disclosure rules must be implemented than those included in the agreement between some parties in parliament and those included in the 2004 proposal. The DoJ has expressed, however, that the pending proposal will be modeled upon both the voluntary agreement and the 2004 proposal. It is therefore not entirely unlikely that the pending proposal will be either illegal under the constitution or not far reaching enough, or both. / I Sverige saknas regler som kräver av politiska partier och kandidater att redovisa mottagna donationer (redovisningskrav). Detta trots att frågan diskuterats under flera decennier. Frånvaron av redovisningskrav innebär att Sverige inte uppfyller vissa av sina internationella åtaganden och att Sverige halkat efter i den mycket tydliga internationella trenden att öka transparensen kring valkampanjernas finansiering. Frånvaron har även lett till omfattande kritik, framförallt från Europarådets grupp mot korruption, Greco, som kritiserat bristen utifrån Europarådets riktlinjer i ämnet. I skrivande stund bereds vid Justitiedepartementet ett förslag till redovisningskrav som kommer att presenteras under våren 2013. Tills vidare är det enda som finns avseende transparens i valkampanjfinansieringen en överenskommelse från 2000, mellan några av partierna i Riksdagen om att frivilligt redovisa vissa mottagna bidrag. År 2004 föreslog en offentlig utredning införandet av redovisningskrav. Förslaget mötte omfattande kritik från remissinstanserna gällande dess förenlighet med regeringsformens, RF:s, rättighetsskydd. RF innehåller ett absolut skydd mot att det allmänna tvingar en enskild att tillkännage sin politiska åskådning och ett absolut skydd mot att det allmänna registrerar en enskilds politiska åskådning. Eftersom dessa skydd är absoluta kan de endast inskränkas genom grundlags-ändring. Det är osäkert om redovisningskrav kan anses vara inskränkningar av dessa absoluta skydd. Om redovisningskrav är inskränkningar av dessa absoluta rättigheter torde det ändock vara möjligt att utforma kraven så att de är förenliga med skydden. RF innehåller även relativa skydd för yttrandefrihet och föreningsfrihet. Redovisningskrav skulle förmodligen inte vara en inskränkning av RF:s skydd för yttrandefriheten men troligtvis vara en inskränkning av RF:s skydd för föreningsfrihet. Detta innebär att inskränkningen endast får göras enligt i RF stadgad ordning. Eftersom möjligheterna att inskränka föreningsfriheten enligt RF är mycket små är det tveksamt om en sådan inskränkning är möjlig att införa utan grundlagsändring. Justitiedepartementet har dock uttryckt att det nya förslaget inte kommer att inkludera något förslag till grundlagsändring. För att Sverige ska uppfylla sina internationella åtaganden avseende öppenhet i valfinansieringen måste mer långtgående redovisningskrav införas än de som ingår i den frivilliga överenskommelsen och som föreslogs av utredningen 2004. Justitiedepartementet har dock uttryckt att just utredningen från 2004 och den frivilliga överenskommelsen ska ligga till grund för de nya redovisningskraven. Det är alltså inte helt osannolikt att det kommande förslaget till redovisningskrav kommer att vara antingen oförenlig med regeringsformen eller inte tillräckligt långtgående, eller både och

Dentro do tema mais amplo do financiamento político, os objetivos desta tese são explicar o surgimento, a disseminação e os efeitos do financiamento público de partidos e campanhas eleitorais. Um dos principais achados desta tese é a constatação de que o modelo de financiamento político varia em função do sistema eleitoral. Em países com sistemas majoritários há uma tendência à adoção de financiamento exclusivamente privado; por outro lado, é possível dizer que o financiamento público é uma característica dos países com sistemas proporcionais, tamanha a sua predominância nesses países no início do século XXI. Além disso, o tipo de financiamento público também varia de acordo com o sistema eleitoral: em sistemas proporcionais é mais presente um tipo de financiamento público que utiliza critérios alocativos baseados no tempo passado, que tende a propiciar uma perpetuação do status quo ante partidário. Em sistemas majoritários, ao contrário, quando existe financiamento público, geralmente são utilizados critérios alocativos baseados no tempo presente, cujo efeito sobre a competição eleitoral é menos pronunciado. Esses achados sustentam a hipótese de que o financiamento público é adotado em sistemas proporcionais como instrumento de restrição do mercado eleitoral em benefício dos partidos mais estabelecidos. / Within the ample theme of political finance, this dissertation aims to explain the emergence, dissemination and the effects of public or state financing of political parties and campaigns. One of the main findings of this dissertation is that models of political financing vary according to electoral systems. In majoritarian system countries there is a tendency towards the adoption of a purely private model of political financing, whereas it can be said that public financing is a feature of proportional system countries given its prevalence in such countries in early 21st century. Furthermore, types of public financing also vary according to electoral systems: proportional countries tend to utilize allocation criteria on the basis of a previous moment, leading to a perpetuation of the party system status quo ante. When there is public financing in majoritarian countries, the allocation criteria are usually based on present time, which has a less pronounced effect on electoral competition. These findings support the hypothesis that public financing is adopted in proportional countries as an instrument to achieve a restrictive effect on the electoral market, benefiting more established parties.