The Office of the Registrar of Political Parties has decided not to register a Generation Z-motivated political party. The Office of the Registrar of Political Parties decided that the names submitted for reservation do not encourage participation.
The registrar stated in a statement on July 11th that, following a thorough examination of the application, the office concluded that certain names fall short of meeting the legislative requirements.
The statement reads as follows: “The law has considered your application and rejected the suggested names because they do not promote inclusivity, in violation of Article 91(1)(a)(e) of the Constitution.”
The Gen Z group suggested several names for registration, many of which expressed the principles they hold. The Gen-Z Movement, the Gen-Z National Movement, and the Gen-Z People’s Alliance are some of the associations that fall under this category.
The Registrar lists several alternative names, including the Gen-Z Peoples Movement, the Gen-Z Democratic Party, and the Gen-Z Alliance Movement.
The list also includes the Gen-Z Democratic Movement, the Gen-Z United Movement, the Gen-Z Political Party, and the Gen-Z Alliance Party. The registrar has the option to expand the list to include these other organizations.
The purpose of each of the names was to convey the voices and ambitions of the young people, with a particular emphasis on the concepts of solidarity, democracy, and cooperation.
The Registrar of Political Parties received a petition during this interim period asking for the Gen Z Party’s registration as a political party.
The petitioner, whose name is James Ogega, submitted the application after the Registrar of Political Parties declined his plea to put the name on hold and register it.
This was the case despite the fact that he had paid the necessary fees as stipulated in Section 4B of the Political Parties Act.
Ogega asserts that the Registrar of Political Parties’ decision directly contradicts the principles outlined in Articles 10, 20(2), 31(3), 27(4), 28, 36, 38, and 232 of the Constitution.
In her statement, she merely asserts that the name does not encourage inclusiveness.
Ogega asserts that there are numerous ways to interpret the name. Some of these interpretations include, but are not limited to, Generation Zote, Generation Zion, General Zod, Gender Z, and General Zeus.
Ogega also brought up the fact that there is a provision in the Political Parties Act known as Section 4B(3) that mandates the registrar to respond to these requests within fourteen days. On the other hand, he got a response twenty-one days later.
“Because the 14 days had passed, the notification time had passed beyond its expiration date. He stated that he expected to receive a letter confirming the name reservation.
