Informing, Inspiring, Impacting

Legal Battle Over “The Gen Z Party” Registration

Image file of registrar of Political Parties, Anne Nderitu

In Summary:

1) James Ogega petitions to recognize “The Gen Z Party” as an official political entity.

2) Registrar rejects party name, citing lack of inclusivity.

The Political Parties Dispute Tribunal is reviewing a case where James Ogega challenges the Registrar of Political Parties’ decision to reject the registration of “The Gen Z Party.” Ogega claims he followed proper procedures and paid required fees, but his application was denied.

On July 16, 2024, Ogega was notified of a letter dated July 11, 2024, which stated the party name was rejected for not promoting inclusivity, as per constitutional requirements.

Ogega argues this decision violates multiple constitutional articles. He contends the Registrar didn’t properly interpret the name before rejection and stated it could have various meanings beyond Generation Z.

“The name ‘Gen Z Party’ can have multiple interpretations, such as Generation Zote, Generation Zion, General Zod, Gender Z, or General Zeus,” Ogega argued, highlighting the ambiguity of the Registrar’s reasoning.

Keep Reading:

Govt Announces Over 7,500 Job Vacancies Nationwide; How to Apply

Govt Announces Over 7,500 Job Vacancies Nationwide; How to Apply

The petitioner also points out that the Registrar made this decision without reviewing the party’s membership list or regional coverage, which he believes is necessary to judge inclusivity.

“The decision made by the Registrar of Political Parties was made before she saw the list of members, the regions covered by the political party so that she could conclude that the name does not promote inclusivity,” the petition stated.

Furthermore, Ogega highlighted that the Registrar’s response came after the 14-day legal limit.

“The 14 days had lapsed, making the notification time-barred. I expected a letter indicating the name was reserved,” he asserted.

Ogega seeks to have the Tribunal declare the Registrar’s decision discriminatory and unconstitutional. He requests the decision be overturned and the party name be reserved retroactively to June 24, 2024.