Despite its democratic intentions, South Africa’s Political Funding Act has failed to capture public interest. With the 2026 local elections approaching, political apathy and deep distrust threaten meaningful democratic engagement.
As South Africa prepares for its upcoming local government elections in 2026, I find myself reflecting deeply on the role of political transparency, accountability, and public engagement in our democracy. Among the most critical — yet widely overlooked — mechanisms meant to uphold democratic integrity is the Political Funding Act, a law introduced in April 2021 with the noble intent of bringing transparency to party finances. But after four years in operation, it is clear that while the law exists, it has not taken root in the minds or hearts of the people it was meant to empower.
As a South African, I cannot ignore the reality that most citizens remain largely indifferent to the Political Funding Act. Worse, many are entirely unaware of its existence or significance. This indifference is not just a symptom of public disengagement; it is a reflection of a broader and more dangerous sentiment: widespread distrust in the entire political system. And as we head toward another election season, this indifference carries weighty implications for the future of our democracy.
The Promise and Purpose of the Political Funding Act
At its core, the Political Funding Act was introduced to enhance transparency in political party finances. It obliges political parties to disclose donations above a certain threshold and mandates regular reporting to the Electoral Commission. The goal was straightforward: to curb corruption, reduce undue influence by wealthy individuals or interest groups, and empower voters with the knowledge of who funds their leaders.
This kind of legislative framework, on paper, should be celebrated. It gives citizens the right to know who is bankrolling political agendas. It is a safeguard meant to ensure that political influence is not purchased behind closed doors. But laws are only as effective as their implementation and the public’s willingness to hold leaders accountable. In South Africa’s case, that willingness appears frighteningly absent.
Public Apathy in a Time of Democratic Crisis
Why are South Africans so indifferent to something so essential? In my view, it is because many citizens have simply lost faith in the system. After decades of unfulfilled promises, political scandals, and deteriorating service delivery, hope has faded. The average voter no longer believes that transparency will lead to change. For them, it’s not about who funds the politicians — it’s about the fact that politicians rarely deliver on what they promise, regardless of who pays their bills.
This mindset is dangerous. It creates a vacuum in which corrupt practices can thrive. When the public stops paying attention, accountability diminishes. When citizens feel powerless, they stop demanding answers. And when democracy becomes a hollow ritual performed every five years, rather than an active, ongoing relationship between government and people, the consequences can be devastating.
The Political Funding Act in Practice: Four Years Later
Looking back at the four years since the Act’s implementation, there have been both commendable efforts and alarming shortcomings. On the one hand, a number of political parties have submitted disclosures, and the Electoral Commission has tried to create platforms for public access to financial data. But these efforts have not been accompanied by effective public education campaigns or civic engagement drives.
I believe one of the greatest failures has been the lack of communication around the Act’s relevance. The general public has not been made to understand why political funding matters to them personally. Without this connection, even well-intentioned policies become distant and irrelevant.
Moreover, there are signs that not all parties are fully complying with the law. Some have been accused of delaying disclosures, submitting incomplete records, or engaging in creative accounting. In the absence of strict penalties or proactive investigations, the law risks becoming more symbolic than functional.
Political Distrust as a Barrier to Engagement
Perhaps the most serious barrier to the Act’s success is not legal loopholes, but emotional fatigue. South Africans are tired — tired of corruption, broken infrastructure, unstable electricity supply, unemployment, and economic stagnation. In such an environment, trust in political parties has eroded. Voter turnout has been declining steadily over the past few election cycles, and there is little to suggest this trend will reverse anytime soon.
As someone who follows politics closely, I understand the frustration. It’s hard to believe in the promise of democracy when basic services are failing and public officials appear more concerned with internal party battles than with the needs of their constituents. But disengagement is not a solution. If anything, it is a surrender — one that gives corrupt forces even more space to operate without oversight.
Moving Forward: What Needs to Change?
So where do we go from here? For the Political Funding Act to fulfill its purpose, a multi-faceted approach is necessary — one that goes beyond technical compliance and addresses the root causes of public apathy and mistrust.
1. Public Education Must Be a Priority
The Electoral Commission and civil society organizations must invest in widespread education campaigns. The average South African needs to understand how political funding affects policy decisions, governance quality, and their everyday lives. This information should be shared in all official languages and through various channels — radio, television, schools, and community meetings.
2. Stronger Enforcement Mechanisms Are Required
The law must be applied equally and strictly. Political parties that fail to comply with disclosure requirements should face real consequences. This includes financial penalties, suspension of public funding, or even disqualification from elections in extreme cases. Without enforcement, transparency becomes meaningless.
3. Transparency Must Be Paired with Access
Making data available is not enough; it must be accessible and understandable. Financial reports should be simplified and visualized so that non-experts can interpret them. Complex legal or financial jargon alienates the very people the law aims to empower.
4. Civic Engagement Needs a Cultural Revival
Restoring faith in democracy requires more than laws. It requires leadership, community activism, and inclusive dialogue. Voters need to feel that their voices matter — not just during elections, but every day. Political literacy must be integrated into school curricula, and young people must be encouraged to participate in shaping the future.
5. Media Must Play a Watchdog Role
Journalists have a profound responsibility to investigate, report, and explain the often-complex world of political funding. A strong, independent media acts as a safeguard against abuse of power by shining light on the flow of money behind political decisions. Instead of focusing solely on high-profile scandals, newsrooms should proactively track donation patterns, expose potential conflicts of interest, and make the public aware of how financial contributions can influence policy. As highlighted by global watchdog organizations, robust journalism is essential in any democracy, especially where public trust is low and accountability mechanisms are fragile. An informed media landscape is not a luxury — it is a necessity for democratic survival.
A Personal Plea to Fellow South Africans
As a citizen, I am not content to sit by silently while our democracy weakens. The Political Funding Act is not perfect, but it is a tool we can use to demand greater accountability. But tools are useless if they sit in drawers, unused and forgotten.
I urge my fellow South Africans not to turn away from politics, no matter how disillusioned you may feel. If we do not engage, we hand over power to those who seek personal gain. If we do not ask questions, we allow lies to become normal. And if we do not vote, we surrender the future.
Our democracy is fragile. But it is not beyond repair. With courage, awareness, and commitment, we can reclaim our voice and shape a government that truly serves the people.
Conclusion
The Political Funding Act was born out of a desire to clean up South African politics. But four years on, its impact remains muted due to widespread public disengagement and institutional weakness. As local elections approach, the need for political transparency has never been greater — yet the appetite for participation appears to be fading.
This is a moment for reflection and action. If we want a political system that reflects our values and serves the public good, we must do more than complain. We must inform ourselves, hold leaders accountable, and above all, stay engaged. Democracy, after all, does not die from one bad law or one corrupt politician — it dies from collective silence.
