Official Gazette, Issue 24 App. (a) on 14 June 2012 7 such that deciding the constitutional issue is necessary to rule on the related requests that have been submitted to the court hearing the case on its merits. For this reason, and because the substantial dispute has its basis on the request to stay and then cancel the Supreme Elections Commission's decision to announce People's Assembly election results for the third individual candidacy electoral district in the governorate of Qalyubia – the content of which was a run-off between the Freedom and Justice Party candidate and the Nour Party candidate over the professional seat in said district. The motion also requested that both candidates be excluded from the contest, along with several other Freedom and Justice Party candidates for the worker seat in this district in the single system, and the resulting effects. Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the aforementioned Law No. 38/1972 had specified the proportion fixed for the closed party-list system, and that allotted for the individual candidacy system, allotting twothirds of the seats in the People's Assembly to the former, and one-third to the latter. Article 6, Paragraph 1 of this law enumerated the rules pertaining to submission of candidacy requests for the People's Assembly in electoral districts allocated for the individual candidacy system. Article 9 bis A of the aforementioned Law No. 38/1972 dealt with the provisions concerning preparation of final candidate lists, and required that the final list of candidates running under the single system specify the political party to which the candidate belongs. Article 5 of the aforementioned Decree-law No. 120/2011 stipulates that whoever submits a candidacy request for the People's Assembly under the individual candidacy system shall not belong to any political party, and not only was this a condition for submitting the candidacy request, but a condition also for his continued membership in the assembly. If he lost this status, then he would be stripped of his membership by a two-thirds majority vote. However, the legislator repealed this stipulation under Article 1 of the aforementioned Decree-law No. 123/2011, where the trend of the legislator's explicit intention is to limit the two-thirds elected under the closed partylist system to members of political parties, and to leave open the remaining one-third elected under the individual candidacy system to both political party members and independents not belonging to any party. There is no doubt that establishing this competition had a definite impact and reciprocal effect on the two-thirds allocated for closed party lists, since if political parties were not competing with independents over that other portion, then a rearrangement would have taken place within the party lists, taking into account the priorities within each party. Furthermore, political party members had the choice between two ways to run for the People's Assembly, the closed party-list system and the individual candidacy system. Independents were deprived of one of these ways, and their rights were limited to the portion allotted for the individual candidacy system, in which political party members also competed. Therefore, the interest in the present case is ascertained in the challenge to the text of the following articles: Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the aforementioned Law No. 38/1972, which was replaced by Decree-law No. 120/2011; the contents of Article 6, Paragraph 1 of this law, which was replaced by Decree-law No. 120/2011, which granted the right to submit a candidacy request for the People's Assembly in electoral districts allotted for the individual candidacy system to political party members as well as