Winnie Babihunga v. Masiko Winnie Komuhamhia & Others30 where it was stated; “The quantitative test was said to be most relevant where numbers and figures are in question whereas the qualitative test in most suitable where the quality of the entire process is questioned and the court has to determine whether or not the election was free and fair.” [104] He further urged that determining whether an election was free and fair taking into account principles of impartiality, neutrality, efficiency, accuracy and accountability involves the interpretation of Articles 81 (e) (v) and 86 of the Constitution. Ideally this means, he urged, that the principles listed under Article 81 are meant to safeguard and promote the centrality of the voter as captured under Article 38 of the Constitution which principles, he submitted, are universal and articulated in various international instruments. [105] The Attorney General further cited the decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa in Richter v. Minister for Home Affairs & Others31 where it was pointed out that the right to vote is symbolic to citizenship and has constitutional importance, the exercise of which is a crucial working part of democracy. Accordingly, the Court stated that we should approach any case concerning the right to vote mindful of the symbolic value of the right to vote as well as the deep, democratic value that 30  Winnie 31Richter Babihunga v. Masiko Winnie Komuhamhia & Others, HTC-OO-CV-EP-004-2001.   v. Minister for Home Affairs & 2 Others, CCT 09/09) [2009] ZACC 3; 2009 (3) SA 615 (CC).   Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            42  |  P a g e