MADLANGA J were conducted separately from the rest of the negotiation process. Enough with the paraphrase: “Our history has produced a rigid pattern of racial division in society. Black residential areas were, and still are, characterised by a lack of amenities, physical infrastructure and services. Where these exist, they are of inferior quality compared to those enjoyed in historically white residential areas. Local government was equally divided along racial lines. In recognition of this history, the negotiations relating to the transformation of local government were conducted separately from the negotiations regarding the transition of power at the national and provincial levels.”109 It makes sense that – for whatever reason – the framers of the Constitution (which post-dates the mentioned negotiations) may have seen a need to introduce in the Constitution a discrete, internal limit applicable only to the system of election of members of Municipal Councils. The problems uniquely attendant to municipalities – involving as they did – the intractable problem of racially based spatial distribution of the South African population could not have ended overnight. Viewed with this background in mind, section 157(2)(a) does not contradict section 19(3)(b). In that context, section 19 which is the primary source of people’s political rights continues to be the fundamental norm on them; not section 157(2)(a), which is tailor-made for municipal elections. The normative force of section 19 continues to apply in every instance where the Constitution has not specified a system of representation different to what section 19 requires. Therefore, in the election of members of the National Assembly and Provincial Legislatures, the normative system the Bill of Rights itself creates in section 19 must apply; it must not be derailed or diverted by provisions specially created for municipalities under section 157(2)(a) because of their unique setting. 109 Executive Council, Western Cape v Minister for Provincial Affairs and Constitutional Development; Executive Council, KwaZulu-Natal v President of the Republic of South Africa [1999] ZACC 13; 2000 (1) SA 661 (CC); 1999 (12) BCLR 1360 (CC) at para 44. 43