By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

That since this was not done, the Registrar’s decision was invalid as being against theprinciples of natural justice. On behalf of the second respondent, Mr. Salula argued that adistinction has to be made between exercise of the powers of the Registrar to refuse togrant full registration to a Political Party and the exercise of his powers under Section 15or the Act canceling the registration of a Political Party.He said that whereas the Registrar must inform the Political Party of his intention tocancel it and hear its representations if any, there is no such obligation when refusing togrant full registration.The learned High Court Judge agreed with Mr. Salula’s argument. Because of theimportance of this argument on this ground of appeal, we intend to quote the learnedjudge’s decision in full to appreciate the process of his reasoning:“Mr. Salula on the other hand, submitted that refusal to grant full registration of thesecond applicant was in accordance with the law, and that refusal to grant full registrationis not the same as cancellation of a registered political party. Section 15(1) of the PoliticalParties Act provides that “The Registrar may cancel the registration of any political partywhich has contravened any of the provisions of the Act”.That however, is subject to subsection (2) which requires the Registrar, inter alia toinform the party concerned of the contravention or loss of qualification and of theintention to cancel the registration. The party concerned will then have an opportunity tomake representation before the Registrar decides to cancel the registrar decides to cancelthe registration. However there is no such provision regarding refusal to grant fullregistration.I think there is logic in that. A political party which is provisionally registered party hasone hundred and eighty days within which to apply for full registration. During thatperiod, it has every opportunity to make consultation with the Registrar before it appliesfor full registration. The condition laid down in the Political Parties Act and theRegulations made there under (published as Government Notice No. 111 of 1992) mustbe complied with.There will be no reason again for the Registrar to give a notice to a provisionallyregistered political party of intention to refuse full registration. I agree with Mr. Salulathat what the second respondent did was according to law and there was no failure ofnatural justice.What the second respondent did was to scrutinize the documents which were presentedby the second applicant and having found that they were not in accordance with the lawand the Constitution he refused to grant full-registration. That was strict application of thelaw as it stands”.This then is the background to the appellants complaint in ground 4. We aregenuinely surprised by the reasoning of the learned judge to the effect that by denying the250