26 Official Gazette – Issue No. 9 (bis) March 1, 2015 Egypt shall be divided into 237 constituencies assigned for individual nominees, and into 4 constituencies for the party list system”. Whereas Article (3) of the same law stipulates that “the range, components, and the number of seats of each constituency, as well as the number of seats assigned to each governorate, shall be determined according to the attached tables, taking into consideration fair representation of population, governorates and voters.” As scheduled in the juridical of this court that the condition of interest - and integrated in it the character - is one of the fundamental conditions that the constitutional case does not be accepted in its absence, and the strength that the judge in the constitutional issue to be required to settle the issue in totality or subsidiary that revolves around it the disagreement in whole or part of it in the substantive prosecute, and its concept is determined in the light of two components: the first: the plaintiff to present - In the limits of the capacity in which prosecuted the text Legislative contested - the evidence that an actual damage has been suffered, and damage should be direct, independent of its elements, possible to recognize and responded by the judiciary satisfaction, and not imagined harm, theoretical or unknown. And the second: the cause of this damage be attributed to the legislative text be contested, and if this text has not been applied originally on the plaintiff, or he was not addressed by its provisions, or had benefited from its advantages, or the prejudice to the rights claimed does not return on him, there is no direct personal interest, so that the revocation of the legislative text in all of these pictures, will not bring any practical benefit to the plaintiff that can change his legal position after deciding in the constitutional case, than before raising it. Whereas Article (6) of the House of Representatives Law lays down the provisions to be followed should a membership be revoked following loss of title or change of partisanship from the status at the time of election, and whereas the plaintiff has not acquired membership of the House of Representatives, this Article shall not apply to him. Thus, there is no direct personal interest in this part of the case. Whereas the present 2014 Constitution lays great importance on the notion of “citizenship”, emphasizing in its first article that the democratic republican system is based on citizenship and rule of law and affirming in its fourth article that “Sovereignty belongs only to the people who shall exercise and protect it. The people are the source of powers, and safeguard their national unity that is based on the principles of equality, justice and equal opportunities among all citizens”. Whereas Constitutional Article (87) states that the “participation of citizens in the public life is a national duty and says that every citizen has the right to vote, run for elections, and express his/her opinion in referendums. To do so, the State shall enter the name of each citizen in the voters’ database without request therefrom provided that he/she satisfies the conditions for voting”. Article (102) of the Constitution calls for a balanced representation of voters. In accordance with the rulings of this Court, it follows that the sovereignty of the people can only be achieved by providing the rights of all citizens to elect their leaders and representatives in charge of ruling the State, provided they fulfill voter conditions. Every citizen has the right to express his free opinion in elections and referenda. No citizen may be deprived of such constitutional right except if prevented of doing so by a temporary or permanent objective reason pertinent to the right to vote, such as not being of legal age to qualify to make sound choices or suffering a mental affection that may impair such ability.