56 S.C. 128\02 show a likelihood that it would be affected by the law impugned. It has no right to seek redress either on behalf of the general public or anyone else. The applicant was not entitled to carry the torch for claimants and voters generally. The impugned provisions related to individuals who were claimants or voters. A political party could be neither a claimant nor a voter and thus it had no locus standi in this matter. On the authority of the United Parties case, supra, I am satisfied that the applicant has no locus standi to challenge sections 8(1),(2),(5) and 22(2). The applicant next seeks to have section 9 of the Act declared unconstitutional. Section 9 of the Act provides as follows:“9. Restrictions in relation to the issue of certain licences (1) Only one licence to provide a national free-to-air radio broadcasting service and one licence to provide a national free-to-air television broadcasting service shall be issued in addition to the national broadcasting services provided by any public broadcaster. (2) Only one signal carrier licence shall be issued to a person other than a public broadcaster. (3) With the exception of a public broadcaster, a broadcasting licence and a signal carrier licence shall not be issued to the same person.” I have no doubt that the applicant has locus standi to challenge this section for a number of reasons. The applicant is applying for a radio broadcasters licence. Section 9(1) permits the granting of only one licence to provide a national free-to-air broadcasting service. This limitation to one licensee no doubt must affect the applicant’s prospects of success in its endeavour to obtain a broadcasting licence. The more the licences are available for issue the better the prospects of success for the