By Sarjo Barrow, Esq
IEC Chairperson Mr Joe Colley warned on April 23, 2026, at the Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara Conference Centre, as reported by Askanwi that holding a congress before receiving official registration amounts to unlawful political activity. While the IEC’s underlying concern is valid, its focus is misplaced. The UNITE movement held its congress on May 16, 2026, and that congress was not only lawful but legally necessary. Denying its registration on that basis would be penalising a movement for following the law to the letter.
Article 25 of the 1997 Constitution plainly states that every citizen has the right to freedom of association, including the right to form and join political parties. This right exists before any application is filed, not after the IEC approves one. Therefore, a group of citizens assembling to elect leaders and adopt a constitution is a constitutionally protected act, period.
More importantly, the spirit of the Elections Act suggests that some internal political process, or congress, must occur before submitting an application. For instance, Section 106(2)(c) of the Elections Act 2025 states that a registration application for a political party must include “the names and addresses of all the executive members of the party.” Not provisional names. Actual leaders, named from day one. For a movement to have an executive, unless leaders simply appoint themselves, those names must come from an internal election process. If a party chooses to do this through a congress, it is still a process the law envisions.
Significantly, Section 106(1)(f) reinforces this view. This section states that the IEC must be satisfied, before granting registration, that “the constitution of the party requires it to hold a biennial congress.” The party must, therefore, already have a constitution, drafted, debated, and adopted by its founding members, before filing. Who adopts a constitution? Members assembled and voted. That is a congress by any definition.
For all the reasons outlined above, an aspiring party has two options. It can hold a congress, elect leaders, adopt its constitution, and submit a complete application under Section 106(2). Or it can file with unelected interim leaders and a constitution that no members have approved, directly contradicting Section 106(1)(b)’s requirement that “the internal organisation of the party conforms to democratic principles.” And if the party subsequently holds a congress where different leaders are elected, Section 107(1)(c) mandates them to update the IEC. Put simply, the law does not merely contemplate a pre-registration congress, but it dictates one.
Where the IEC’s concern belongs
Having said all of this, there is conduct the IEC should focus on, and it has nothing to do with unregistered movements gathering for a congress to select leaders.
Consider a movement whose registration is pending. Its leader begins publicly campaigning for the presidency. Supporters rally under the movement’s flag and emblem, both pending registration. The leader, knowing the party is not yet registered, files as an independent candidate in a public election but presents himself as the movement’s candidate, using its colors and logo. This is where the constitutional protection of Article 25 ends and the Elections Act steps in.
Section 104 reserves the right to “sponsor candidates for public elections” solely for registered political parties. An unregistered movement cannot sponsor anyone, directly or indirectly. Running a campaign under an unregistered party’s banner violates the law.
Attempting to run as an independent does not fix this issue. Section 49(1)(b) requires every candidate to submit a “representative symbol,” the symbol by which they want to be identified. A candidate campaigning under the emblem of an unregistered movement falsely presents that movement to voters as a legitimate registered party. Voters cannot know that it has no legal standing under the Act. Section 107(2)(b) allows the IEC to intervene when symbols may mislead or confuse voters, a concern that is even greater when the symbol belongs to something not officially recognized.
Section 86(2) further mandates that all campaign material “identify the issuing candidate or political party.” Presenting an unregistered movement as a sponsoring party is factually false. Any offense resulting from this falls under Section 126’s general penalties, with mandatory referral to the Attorney General under Section 127.
While the constitutional right to associate, organise, and advocate is broad and protected, Article 25 does not authorize a movement to conduct an election campaign as a phantom party, use unregistered symbols, or present a leader as a party candidate when the party exists in name only, without legal registration. At that point, the movement is no longer exercising freedom of association. It is engaging in deception within the electoral process, and that is exactly what the IEC should monitor, not bother itself unnecessarily with law-abiding citizens’ congresses.
