PPRC Chief Faces Backlash
By Mohamed Kamara
The Chairman of the Political Parties Regulation Commission (PPRC) has come under increasing criticism following remarks made during the presentation of a registration certificate to the newly approved Humble Africana Development Party (HADP), in which he stated that the Commission would no longer tolerate what he described as “inactive” or “dead” political parties.
The comments have sparked debate among political observers and legal analysts, with critics arguing that the Chairman’s position exceeds the Commission’s constitutional mandate and lacks legal backing.
Edward Jimmy Scott of the University of Heidelberg, Germany, told this newspaper that the Chairman must exercise caution and operate strictly within the framework of the Constitution. He noted that the PPRC was established to regulate political parties based on constitutional provisions that guarantee Sierra Leoneans the right to form political parties, provided they satisfy the prescribed legal requirements.
According to Scott, the Commission has historically maintained that any group meeting the constitutional criteria is entitled to political party registration, despite repeated public calls to restrict the number of registered parties.
He referred to Recommendation 71 of the Tripartite Committee, which proposes that any political party failing to secure at least five percent of the vote in two consecutive general elections should be deregistered. However, he pointed out that the recommendation has not yet been enacted into law by Parliament.
Scott further explained that the recommendation remains contentious after minority political parties reportedly argued that, if adopted, it should apply equally to all parties, including the ruling Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) and the main opposition All People’s Congress (APC), based on clearly defined electoral thresholds. He said disagreements over the proposal have stalled its implementation.
The academic also accused the PPRC of inconsistency in enforcing its regulations. He cited the suspension of the Unity Party (UP) from participating in the previous elections over its alleged failure to establish offices across the provinces, arguing that several other registered political parties were not subjected to the same standard despite facing similar circumstances.
Scott questioned why the Unity Party was singled out, alleging that the Commission’s decision at the time appeared selective. He challenged the PPRC to publicly identify political parties, apart from the SLPP and APC, that fully comply with all statutory registration requirements.
He further observed that minority political parties often become politically relevant during periods of disagreement between the country’s two dominant parties, when their support is sought to influence political outcomes.
Drawing comparisons with other African countries, Scott noted that the proliferation of political parties is common across the continent. He said countries such as Nigeria, Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire have numerous registered parties, although political competition is largely dominated by two major parties, with smaller parties often emerging from defections, ethnic movements, political uprisings or ideological realignments.
Scott also questioned the effectiveness of the PPRC’s regulatory framework, asking whether political parties are required to maintain minimum bank balances, submit annual financial statements or declare their assets before being granted registration.
He argued that political parties would continue to emerge unless more transparent and consistent registration standards are introduced. He concluded that describing registered political parties as “dead” is inappropriate, particularly when many continue to exist legally despite their limited electoral performance.
The PPRC has not publicly responded to the criticisms at the time of publication.
