Official Gazette – Issue No. 9 (bis) March 1, 2015 21 the parliament, but to enrich its works through creative effort that interacts with the responsibilities of the representatives of the people and that requires from the one that entrusted the honor of representing the Egyptian nation to have the moral, psychological, mental, scientific and practical properties, which means the need to weigh the competing candidates in the light of the best appropriate to entrust the task of legislation in the light of their adequacy, integrity, perseverance to work and their scientific and practical ability to bear the burden related to public affairs, and must always be the best elements of the society to assume the functions of general affair. Whereas The choice – as considered – selective work – presumably in the broader circumstances – that the competing candidates of the seats of the HoR do not unify in their scientific and practical competence to assume it, and some of them has elements of excellence and preference that is to weigh one another, and that the assessment of these elements to determine between them who is more worthy and more deserving of selection, is an objective process not issued the body assuming it according to its desires, and does not express its whims, as the voters body has to compare between these elements in the light of facts, and to weigh each of them with the balance of right, justice and eligibility, so that its evaluation integrates with reality. Based on the above, and whereas the legislator has considered within the discretionary authority granted by the constitution to him, to oblige the applicant for nomination, to attach with the nomination request a statement includes his biography, for his introduction, and specially his scientific and practical experience, to make available for each voter real ability to differentiate through it between the competing candidates on the representatives seats, and since the legislative decided this condition in general abstract rule, that all the candidates from membership of HoR stand equally in front of it, without including constraint or barrier to run for nomination, he does not go outside the limits determined by the constitution or deviated from principles of equality before the law and equal opportunities, or confiscate the freedom of the voter in this area that elevates his/her responsibility from just to express his/her opinion in an affair that reflects a special benefit for him, to efficient representation in the highest legislation bodies, and if the impugned provision does not violate the constitution in other manner, the court rejects this part of the case. Whereas, Article (10) of the law of the house of representatives, has committed the applicant for nomination, to attach with the nomination request a receipt of deposit of an amount of three thousand pounds (EGP 3,000) to the treasury of the court of first instance as insurance for the applicant for candidacy in the constituencies allocated for election by the individual system and an amount of six thousand pounds (EGP 6,000) for the list allocated for it (15) seats, the purpose of this insurance, as set forth in Article (26) of the same law is to deduct from it the costs of removing the election posters and this amount or the remaining of it after deducting these costs to be refunded to the candidate during thirty days max. from date of declaration of the election result, and the legislator took into account in assessing the insurance the value of the actual cost to remove the posters, and the responsibility of that, and his evaluation in all of this was based on objective ground aiming to achieve objectives that there is no dispute about their legitimacy, and ensuring application to the identical legal positions that are not in excess of their requirements, if the plaintiff claimed that this in contrary to the constitution provisions, be misplaced really by wrap it up, and the court rejects this part of the case.