ECIElection Campaign-Finance Index

The section explicitly establishes contribution limits in statutory text: a €4,600 ceiling for individual donations and a 20% cash-donation cap. The limits are codified in the Code électoral itself, not delegated to administrative bodies. While the section provides that amounts are updated annually by decree, the framework and baseline limits originate from statute, satisfying the criterion for procedural clarity of the contribution-limit framework.

“Les dons consentis par une personne physique dûment identifiée pour le financement de la campagne d'un ou plusieurs candidats lors des mêmes élections ne peuvent excéder 4 600 euros.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article L118-2 addresses administrative procedures for contesting election results based on campaign spending limits and the review of campaign accounts by a designated commission. It does not codify rules governing independent expenditures or third-party spending separate from candidate committees. The section deals with post-election dispute resolution and campaign-account review procedures, not the framework for independent-expenditure regulation.

No matching sections in corpus.

The section defines thresholds for when a campaign account must be established (1% of votes or receipt of donations), triggering disclosure obligations. However, the specific monetary disclosure threshold for reporting individual contributions is not enumerated in this statute section—it is referenced to other articles (L. 52-8, L. 52-11) and partly delegated to regulation (décret) for candidates receiving less than 5% of votes. The procedural clarity is incomplete because the contribution-reporting floor itself is not fully codified here.

“Chaque candidat ou candidat tête de liste soumis au plafonnement des dépenses électorales prévu à l'article L. 52-11 est tenu d'établir un compte de campagne lorsqu'il a obtenu au moins 1 % des suffrages exprimés ou s'il a bénéficié de dons de personnes physiques conformément à l'article L. 52-8”

The section establishes a penalty (ineligibility for one year) for failure to file a campaign account within prescribed conditions and deadlines, referencing article L. 52-12 for the specifics. However, the section itself does not enumerate the filing schedule or deadlines; it merely incorporates them by reference to another article. To satisfy DISC.2 fully, this section or the referenced article would need to explicitly state the actual deadlines (e.g., 'within 60 days post-election'). The delegation to another article means the procedural clarity is split across the code, reducing statutory enumeration in this specific section.

“dans les conditions et le délai prescrits par l'article L. 52-12”

The statute explicitly requires disclosure of contributor identity (nom), nationality, and tax-domicile address in campaign account annexes. However, it does not mandate disclosure of occupation or employer, which are components of 'full identity' under the criterion's definition. The procedural framework (recording, receipt issuance, CNCCFP validation) is statutorily grounded, but the identity fields are incomplete.

“l'identité, la nationalité et l'adresse du domicile fiscal du donateur”

Section IV explicitly mandates that the national campaign-finance commission must publish campaign accounts in an open, machine-readable standard and in the official journal. This creates a statutory duty of public accessibility; the filing deadline (by 18:00 on the tenth Friday after the first round, per Section II) is separately defined. The provision satisfies the statutory requirement for online public access.

“La Commission nationale des comptes de campagne et des financements politiques assure la publication des comptes de campagne dans un standard ouvert, aisément réutilisable et exploitable par un système de traitement automatisé, et assure leur publication au Journal officiel.”

The section establishes a clear criminal penalty schedule codified in statute: imprisonment of two years and a €15,000 fine for offering, promising, or giving offers/advantages to influence voters, and identical penalties for accepting or soliciting such offers. Both the criminal grade (imprisonment) and monetary sanction (fine amount) are explicitly specified, satisfying the statutory enumeration requirement for penalty schedules.

“est puni de deux ans d'emprisonnement et 15 000 € d'amende”

The section identifies the Commission nationale des comptes de campagne et des financements politiques as the enforcement body with authority to challenge receipt validity and audit compliance. However, the section provides no information about how this body is appointed, whether the appointment process involves multiple branches, or what protections exist against in-cycle political control. The procedural grant of enforcement power is clear, but the institutional independence criterion cannot be assessed from this text alone.

“La Commission nationale des comptes de campagne et des financements politiques peut mettre en cause la validité du reçu délivré par le mandataire et enregistré par elle si elle constate, lors du contrôle du compte de campagne, une irrégularité au regard des dispositions des articles L. 52-4 à L. 52-13 et L. 52-16.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section (R39-12) addresses threat assessment and protection measures for candidates facing electoral violence, not campaign-finance violations. It establishes an administrative procedure for evaluating threats to candidates and does not create any private right of action for campaign-finance breaches. The criterion requires statutory authorization for citizens or parties to sue for campaign-finance violations; this section contains no such provision.

The section explicitly prohibits by statute any direct or indirect material contributions or aid from a foreign state or foreign legal entity to any candidate, for any election expense. This satisfies the criterion's requirement that foreign-source prohibition be codified in statute rather than left to regulation or administrative discretion.

“Aucun candidat ne peut recevoir, directement ou indirectement, pour quelque dépense que ce soit, des contributions ou aides matérielles d'un Etat étranger ou d'une personne morale de droit étranger.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article L52-9 addresses disclosure and identification requirements for electoral fundraising associations and financial representatives. It requires documentation to specify the candidate(s) or list receiving donations and to identify the fundraising entity or mandatary, but contains no provisions addressing foreign-source funds, indirect foreign channels, foreign nationals operating through domestic entities, or foreign-controlled legal structures. The section focuses entirely on transparency and attribution of domestic fundraising vehicles, not on the prevention or verification of foreign-source contributions through pass-through mechanisms.

The section requires payment service providers to furnish 'all information required' per article R. 39-1 and an attestation of 'origin of funds and the status of the donor as a natural person,' but the text does not explicitly state whether this includes verification of non-foreign-source status or relies solely on attestation. The reference to external articles (L. 52-8, L. 52-7-1, R. 39-1) means the full verification standard cannot be assessed from this excerpt alone; however, the requirement for providers to establish 'procedures' to ensure compliance suggests some verification mechanism beyond self-attestation.

“Que le prestataire lui fournit, pour chaque donateur, toutes les informations requises en application de l'article R. 39-1, concomitamment au versement des fonds sur le compte de dépôt ouvert par le mandataire, ainsi qu'une attestation sur l'origine des fonds et la qualité de personne physique du donateur ou prêteur”

The statute mandates detailed separate accounting and recordkeeping of financial operations for signature-collection campaigns (comptabilité annexe et détaillée), establishing a statutory recordkeeping requirement. However, the section does not specify the retention period, which is a critical element of a records-retention requirement. The statute requires creation and maintenance of records but is silent on how long they must be kept.

“L'ensemble des opérations financières conduites par un parti ou groupement en vue de la campagne de collecte de soutiens fait l'objet d'une comptabilité annexe et détaillée dans les comptes de ce parti ou groupement politique.”

The section requires transmission of account information and supporting documents to the campaign manager for attachment to the campaign statement, establishing a record-retention mechanism. However, it does not specify any mandatory post-election audit procedure, threshold-triggered audit, or routine audit cycle. The delegation to decree ("Un décret en Conseil d'Etat détermine...") leaves audit-access procedures to regulation rather than statute.

“Toutes les informations relatives à ces comptes et aux justificatifs des mouvements enregistrés sont transmises au mandataire du candidat pour être annexées au compte de campagne.”