ECIElection Campaign-Finance Index

Section 17(8) enumerates permissible sources of income (contributions, membership fees, donations, loans, etc.), establishing a statutory framework for what parties may receive. However, the section does not specify contribution *limits* for any of these sources—neither maximum amounts nor any explicit statement that there are no limits. The statute codifies which types of contributions are allowed but leaves the quantitative framework (whether limits exist and what they are) unclear or to be found elsewhere in the statute.

“(8) Příjmem strany a hnutí mohou být: a) příspěvek ze státního rozpočtu České republiky na úhradu volebních nákladů, b) příspěvek ze státního rozpočtu České republiky na činnost strany a hnutí (dále jen "příspěvek na činnost"), c) členské příspěvky, d) dary, dědictví a bezúplatná plnění, e) příjmy z nájmu, pachtu a zcizení movitého a nemovitého majetku, f) úroky z vkladů, g) příjmy vznikající z účasti na podnikání jiných právnických osob podle odstavce 3, h) příjmy z pořádání tombol, kulturních, společenských, sportovních, rekreačních, vzdělávacích a politických akcí, i) zápůjčky a úvěry poskytnuté bankou, platební institucí nebo institucí elektronických peněz nebo pobočkou zahraniční banky, platební instituce nebo instituce elektronických peněz na území České republiky, j) příspěvek ze státního rozpočtu České republiky na podporu činnosti politického institutu.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section is purely procedural, addressing judicial review of election results and remedies for campaign-finance violations (court proceedings, timelines, and financial penalties for breaches). It contains no substantive rules defining what independent expenditures are, whether they are permitted, limited, disclosed, or how third-party spending separate from candidate committees is regulated. The section references 'zvláštním zákonem' (special law/statute), indicating the substantive rules exist elsewhere, but this particular section does not codify independent-expenditure rules.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses advertisement regulation during election campaigns, specifically prohibiting anonymous election-related advertising under the broadcast advertising law. It does not address campaign contributions—anonymous or otherwise—or their statutory disposition (return, forfeiture, etc.). The criterion requires statutory definition of how anonymous monetary contributions are handled; this section pertains only to media advertising rules.

The statute defines specific thresholds for disclosure of certain items (1000 Kč for donor identity details, 50000 Kč for inherited property and in-kind benefits, 50000 Kč for member contributions). However, the section does not clearly establish a general contribution-disclosure threshold in the sense of 'contributions below X amount need not be reported at all'—instead, it specifies which details must accompany reports at various thresholds. The core disclosure obligation itself (reporting contributions) is mandated, but the criterion asks whether the threshold amount triggering disclosure is statutorily defined. The thresholds present here govern *detail level* (e.g., omit birth date for gifts under 1000 Kč) rather than a threshold exempting contributions from disclosure altogether.

“u darů nepřevyšujících částku 1000 Kč se datum narození neuvádí”

The statute explicitly establishes a filing schedule for party financial reports: annual submission by April 1st. This is a specific, enumerated deadline codified directly in statute (not left to administrative discretion). The filing deadline is concrete and unambiguous, and the provision includes a follow-up enforcement deadline (April 15th for late submissions), demonstrating procedural clarity on the filing cadence.

“Strany a hnutí jsou povinny předložit každoročně do 1. dubna Úřadu výroční finanční zprávu”

Section 18(4) mandates that every donor must be identified by data specified in § 19h(1)(h), which provides a statutory reference to detailed identity requirements. However, the section itself does not enumerate those requirements—it merely cross-references another provision. The text quoted requires identification but does not specify whether name, address, occupation, and employer are all included in the referenced provision. This creates statutory grounding for identification but lacks exhaustive enumeration within the section itself, warranting a 'partial' score of 1 (name only is identifiable from context, but full identity elements are not confirmed in this excerpt).

“Každý dárce musí být identifikován údaji podle § 19h odst. 1 písm. h).”

Section § 19h(5) expressly requires that the annual financial report ('Výroční finanční zpráva') be made public by the Office ('Úřad') on its internet pages. The statute mandates public accessibility of filings without delegating the publication decision to administrative discretion. The statute also specifies in § 19h(3) that filings must be submitted via an electronic application on the Office's website, and § 19h(4) establishes a defined 15-calendar-day correction period, all of which supports timely online access. No explicit publication deadline is stated in the text, but the statutory requirement for electronic filing and mandatory publication provides clear procedural grounding for public online access.

“Výroční finanční zprávu Úřad zveřejní na svých internetových stránkách.”

The section codifies a civil penalty schedule with specified monetary amounts tied to discrete violations: 200,000 CZK for certain breaches, 2,000,000 CZK for others, and forfeiture or twice the gift value for donor-return violations. However, the section treats violations as 'přestupky' (misdemeanors/administrative infractions) rather than criminal offenses; no criminal grades or custodial penalties are specified, limiting the score to 1 under the 0-2 ordinal rule.

“Za přestupek podle odstavce 2 písm.a) až d) a f) lze uložit pokutu do 200000 Kč, za přestupek podle odstavce 1 nebo odstavce 2 písm. e) pokutu do 2000000 Kč a za přestupek podle odstavce 2 písm. g) pokutu ve výši rovnající se dvojnásobku hodnoty daru nebo jiného bezúplatného plnění nebo propadnutí věci.”

The section explicitly establishes the enforcement body (Úřad) as an independent organ protected from arbitrary political interference through statutory mandate ('řídí se pouze zákony' / governed only by laws; intervention permitted only 'na základě zákona' / on basis of law). However, the text does not enumerate the appointment mechanism or describe whether the process involves multiple branches; it addresses independence but not the procedural details of multi-branch appointment, which is the core of ENF.2.

“Úřad je nezávislý orgán; ve své činnosti se řídí pouze zákony a jinými právními předpisy. (3) Do činnosti Úřadu lze zasahovat jen na základě zákona.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 58b addresses procedural timing and notification requirements for supplementary and new elections in Czech municipal council contests, specifically when supplementary elections cannot produce a quorum of 5 mandates. The section contains no language establishing, recognizing, or enabling a private right of action for any violations—campaign-finance or otherwise. The criterion requires statutory authorization for citizens or parties to sue for campaign-finance breaches; this section is entirely about election scheduling and does not engage that topic.

Section 18(1)(o) explicitly prohibits parties and movements from accepting gifts or other gratuitous benefits from non-Czech citizens and non-EU citizens without permanent or temporary Czech residence registration. This statutory provision clearly enumerates the foreign-source prohibition as a black-letter rule, establishing that foreign contributions are prohibited by law.

“od fyzické osoby, která není státním občanem České republiky nebo státním občanem jiného členského státu Evropské unie, který je přihlášen k trvalému nebo přechodnému pobytu na území České republiky”

The statute prohibits parties from owning property outside Czech territory, which provides a direct asset-ownership restriction. However, the section does not comprehensively address indirect foreign-source channels such as foreign nationals funding domestic entities that donate to parties, foreign-controlled domestic corporations, or pass-through mechanisms. The prohibition is narrowly tailored to asset location rather than tracing foreign influence through corporate structures or domestic intermediaries.

“Strana a hnutí nesmějí vlastnit majetek mimo území České republiky.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 28 of Law 62/2003 regulates voter registration for EU citizens in European Parliament elections, not campaign finance or contributor verification. It contains no provisions regarding campaign committees, contribution verification, foreign-source prohibitions, or attestation procedures relevant to FOR.3.

The section establishes statutory requirements that parties must maintain separate accounts for different types of funds and must provide account identifiers to the oversight office, which creates a framework for record-keeping. However, the statute does not explicitly specify a defined retention period (e.g., "records must be kept for X years"), nor does it enumerate what specific documentation (contributor lists, expenditure records, bank statements) must be retained. The procedural framework assumes records exist and are accessible via special accounts, but lacks explicit statutory grounding of retention duration and scope.

“Strany a hnutí a politické instituty vedou oddělené účty pro a) příspěvky ze státního rozpočtu, příjmy z darů a jiných bezúplatných plnění, b) plnění vyplývající z pracovněprávního vztahu ke straně a hnutí a politickému institutu, c) financování volebních kampaní za podmínek stanovených volebními zákony, d) ostatní příjmy a výdaje.”

The section establishes a central administrative office (Office) with statutory oversight ('dohled') of party and political-movement finances, creating the institutional foundation for audit access. However, the section does not specify mandatory audit procedures, thresholds, sampling mechanisms, or statutory audit cycles—only that oversight exists 'in the scope set by law,' deferring detail to other statutory provisions not quoted here.

“Zřizuje se Úřad se sídlem v Brně jako ústřední správní úřad pro dohled nad hospodařením stran a hnutí v zákonem stanoveném rozsahu.”