B. Alleged violations due to the manner of choosing returning officers 95. The Applicants allege that the manner in which returning officers are appointed violates their right to participate in the government of their choice as well as their right to equality and equal protection before the law. i. Allegations relating to the right to participate in the government of one’s country 96. The Applicants’ challenge the manner in which returning officers are appointed under sections 7(1), 7 (2), 7(3) of the NEA. According to the Applicants, these provisions violate the Charter by “… disallowing the existence of a free and fair election through having electoral officials who are appointees of the president, who is also a chairman of the ruling party and potential candidate with a direct interest in the elections process”. The Applicants also argue that the provisions do not contain any criteria or qualification or guiding principles that should inform the appointing process thereby giving “… leeway for abuse of power by the President in terms of who to appoint to occupy such a position”. 97. The Applicant’s further argue that, section 7(3) of the NEA, by providing that the Electoral Commission may “where circumstances so require” appoint any person in the public service as a returning officer, introduce “… wide subjectivity and likely abuse of power” due to a failure to clarify the circumstances under which the Electoral Commission may act. To buttress their allegations, the Applicants submitted a list of individuals who they allege were members of the ruling Chama Cha Mapinduzi when they were appointed as returning officers. 98. In their Reply, the Applicants further contend, among other things, that the taking of an oath by an appointee “… is a mere formality which does little to make the appointee independent. It does not at all amount to a safeguard against him being non-impartial”. * 27