MADLANGA J submissions. Therefore, OUTA is admitted as a second amicus. OUTA’s application for the admission of the Van Zyl Slabbert and Motlanthe reports as evidence is dismissed. Collectively, the reports before us total 120 pages. All that OUTA relies on in the reports amounts to no more than a paltry five pages. There was absolutely no reason why this Court and, indeed, the parties should be burdened with these documents, let alone so close to the hearing. Jurisdiction and leave to appeal At the centre of this matter are two issues. The first is whether – in making accessing political office possible only through membership of political parties – the Electoral Act unjustifiably limits the right to freedom of association guaranteed in section 18 of the Constitution. The second involves a determination of the content of the right enshrined in section 19(3)(b) of the Constitution and whether the Electoral Act unjustifiably limits that right. Obviously, both questions do engage this Court’s constitutional jurisdiction. As the discussion that follows will soon show, there are reasonable prospects of success. Also, as our earlier judgment on the question of urgency observed, this matter raises novel and far-reaching issues.20 Both issues are without doubt of import. And, in the circumstances of this case, it makes no difference that leave is being sought to appeal directly to this Court. Having postponed the matter in April 2019 and not dismissed it outright on the basis that a direct appeal was not warranted, it would be most unjust of us to send the parties back at this late stage to follow the usual appellate hierarchy. The matter now cries out for a saving in time and costs. It is in the interests of justice to grant leave to appeal directly to this Court. 20 New Nation Movement NPC above n 1 at para 1. 7