Overview:

• Recognition and registration are amalgamated rather than ideally differentiated as is held in recognitionism; legal registration seems to equate to existential recognition.

• The restrictive requirement of membership quotas and the subjective requirement of adequately educated religious leaders provide ample scope for the government to restrict the registration process.

• Further subjective terminology used in the legislation such as the deregistering of groups that are judged to be “subversive" creates additional scope for the government to unjustly restrict religious activity that it does not approve of.

• The ongoing violence in the society and interethnic tensions are regarded to be helped in part through the use of recognition as a tool to spread awareness of the importance of the diversity of belief and practice and to expand religious education

• The rule of mandatory registration contravenes the Bielefeldt provision.

Positive elements:

• Horizontal recognition is in effect.

• Procedures exist for existential recognition and although this may not exactly corresponding to the existential recognition of recognitionist theory, this is a receptive attribute.

Recommendations:

• Establish differentiation between legal registration for physical entities (e.g. organisations) and existential recognition for abstract entities (e.g. belief systems, denominations, communities).