Februarie and Another v Electoral Commission of South Africa and Another (003/2023 EC) [2023] ZAEC 3 (1 August 2023)

Februarie and Another v Electoral Commission of South Africa and Another (003/2023 EC) [2023] ZAEC 3 (1 August 2023)

The Court found that the applicants lacked locus standi to bring the application, as previously determined by both the Electoral Court and the Northern Cape High Court. The application was also barred by res judicata, as it sought substantially the same relief based on the same cause of action as prior proceedings. Regulation 9 was held to be constitutional, as it serves to protect both the IEC and political parties from internal disputes and does not infringe on political rights. The IEC acted lawfully and within its mandate by refusing to amend SCM's particulars without a request from the registered leader. The urgency requirement was met, as the application was brought promptly after...

Citation
[2023] ZAEC 3
Parties
Applicant: Ronald Februarie; Applicant: Siyathemba Community Movement; Respondent: Electoral Commission of South Africa; Respondent: Johan Andrew Phillips
Court
Electoral Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 August 2023
Case Number
003/2023 EC
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Application to Review IEC Decision and Constitutional Challenge
Judges
Zondi JA, Modiba J, Shongwe AJ, Ntlama-Makhanya, Phooko
Legal Topics
Political Rights, Regulation of Political Parties, Judicial Review, Locus Standi, Res Judicata
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Political Rights Regulation of Political Parties Judicial Review Locus Standi Res Judicata

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Februarie

Applicant

Siyathemba Community Movement

Applicant

Electoral Commission of South Africa

Respondent

Johan Andrew Phillips

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Application to Review IEC Decision and Constitutional Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Regulation 9 of the Regulations for the Registration of Political Parties 2004 is unconstitutional.
  2. 2 Whether the Independent Electoral Commission breached its statutory duties under s 5(1)(f) of the Electoral Commission Act 51 of 1996.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have locus standi to bring the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicants lacked locus standi to bring the application, as previously determined by both the Electoral Court and the Northern Cape High Court. The application was also barred by res judicata, as it sought substantially the same relief based on the same cause of action as prior proceedings. Regulation 9 was held to be constitutional, as it serves to protect both the IEC and political parties from internal disputes and does not infringe on political rights. The IEC acted lawfully and within its mandate by refusing to amend SCM's particulars without a request from the registered leader. The urgency requirement was met, as the application was brought promptly after...