MADLANGA J In sum, I am unpersuaded that, because of the constitutional provisions I have dealt with in paragraphs [65]-[99], it is not obligatory to afford independent candidates an opportunity to stand for and, if elected, to hold office. Therefore, Mogoeng CJ was correct in My Vote Counts II when he said: “[Section 19(3)(b)] addresses the fundamental right every adult citizen has ‘to stand for public office and, if elected, to hold office’. Our Constitution does not itself limit the enjoyment of this right to local government elections. The right to stand for public office is tied up to the right to ‘vote in elections for any legislative body’ that is constitutionally established. Meaning, every adult citizen may in terms of the Constitution stand as an independent candidate to be elected to municipalities, Provincial Legislatures or the National Assembly. The enjoyment of this right is not and has not been proscribed by the Constitution. It is just not facilitated by legislation.”110 It will be recalled that the High Court held that this was obiter. And before us arguments and counter-arguments were advanced on that. It is unnecessary to enter that debate for that matters not in the circumstances. Unconstitutionality of previous elections The Electoral Commission submitted that the success of the applicants’ argument would mean the first two democratic elections111 took place in a manner that breached fundamental rights protected by the Bill of Rights. According to the Electoral Commission, that would be absurd. It substantiated this by contending that what the applicants want us to hold means the framers of the Constitution created a fundamental contradiction within the Constitution: whilst the Constitution guaranteed independents 110 My Vote Counts II above n 18 at para 29. 111 That is, the elections conducted under the interim Constitution and the first elections held under the Constitution. 44