4 Official Journal – Issue No. 22 (bis) on 03 June 2013 After preparation of the lawsuit, the Board of Commissioners reported its opinion. The Board of Commissioners reviewed the case in the manner prescribed in the minutes of the hearing. The court decided to issue the ruling today. The Court After reviewing documents and after deliberation: Whereas facts of the case - as evidenced by the initiatory pleadings and all documents- indicate that Mr. Adnan Mokhtar Osman Mohamed filed an action dated 19/02/2012, #8679 of the 20th judicial year, before the Administrative Court, Quenna district, asking to suspend execution and then repeal decision of Shura Council elections results for Luxor’s constituency of the individual system, including the runoff held between four candidates, not including the plaintiff, and its implications thereof, of which the most important are suspending polling procedures of the run-off election scheduled to be held on 22/12/2012, seizure of all envelops and documents of the conducted elections. Mr. Adnan explained the case saying that he stood for Shura Council elections for Luxor’s individual seat, as an independent candidate, held on 14 – 15 February 2012, and results were announced on 18/02/2012, in which he lost, and runoff elections were conducted among four candidates. The plaintiff considered balloting and sorting processes invalid due to change in his election number, and to removal of his election symbol in ballot papers, in a way that hindered his supporters to vote for him. Besides, the results announcement shows contradictions in the number of votes, in addition to scrapes and modifications in some forms, while others are not signed by heads of the committees. In 21/12/2013 session, the Administrative Court decided to decline the urgent part of the lawsuit. Since the plaintiff has not accepted such ruling, he challenged it before the Supreme Administrative Court pursuant to appeal No. 10627/58 Judicial Year, Supreme. In 7/7/2012 session, appeal examination division of that court has decided to halt hearing the appeal and referring the papers to the Supreme Constitutional Court to decide on the constitutionality of the texts stated in the referral ruling; owing to its violation of the provisions of the constitutional declaration issued on 25/9/2011. Whereas the plaintiff has referred in his note, filed in case the court decides to set the lawsuit for adjudication, to the annulment of the new constitutional document owing to lacking the majority required by article (60) of the constitutional declaration, other violations of the conditions required by this article for the validity and integrity of the referendum as well as the unconstitutionality of the Presidential decree calling for referendum on the constitution. Whereas what the plaintiff raised is false, that the litigation of this court has settled that the judicial control over the constitutionality of the laws and regulations adopted by the SCC finds its basis – as a general basis – in Sharia principle, rule of law and state submission. However, this basis is replied to that the constitution with its precedence and sublimity as the supreme main law and pre-issuance procedures – carried out pursuant to article (60) of the constitutional declaration referred thereto – are out of the range of this judicial control, based on the fact that the nature of such texts and works declines to be subject to a judicial lawsuit; since the constituent authority responsible for drafting the constitutional document is superior to all state