The Electoral Court's judgment in the ANC vs the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) and uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party brought into sharp focus the vibrancy of South Africa's democracy.
The court ruled on Tuesday that the newly formed party led by former president Jacob Zuma could participate in the elections in May, dismissing the ruling party's application to have it deregistered.
In its heads of argument the ANC argued the IEC broke the law by allowing the MK Party to supplement its already rejected application.
In a unanimous judgment the court said the argument “holds no water”.
It said there is no law suggesting the commission is not allowed to give political parties the green light to supplement applications even if they were initially rejected.
The court found other parties had previously supplemented their applications.
“The ANC's contention that because the section makes no reference to supplementation, an application cannot be supplemented holds no water,” the court said.
POLL | Is the ANC vs IEC, MK Party judgment good for SA’s democracy?
The Electoral Court's judgment in the ANC vs the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) and uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party brought into sharp focus the vibrancy of South Africa's democracy.
The court ruled on Tuesday that the newly formed party led by former president Jacob Zuma could participate in the elections in May, dismissing the ruling party's application to have it deregistered.
In its heads of argument the ANC argued the IEC broke the law by allowing the MK Party to supplement its already rejected application.
In a unanimous judgment the court said the argument “holds no water”.
It said there is no law suggesting the commission is not allowed to give political parties the green light to supplement applications even if they were initially rejected.
The court found other parties had previously supplemented their applications.
“The ANC's contention that because the section makes no reference to supplementation, an application cannot be supplemented holds no water,” the court said.
TimesLIVE
MORE: