12 [22] On the 21st January 2009 the principal election officer responded by letter advising his attorney that he did not fall in the 5 classes of people who were entitled to a special vote whilst being out of the country on election day and that the second respondent was bound by the legislation. [23] On the 16th January 2009 the second respondent communicated draft procedures on special votes to all political parties and the applicant attached a copy thereof to his founding affidavit as annexure “3”. Therein an exposition of the legislation was given with examples. In this regard the applicant stated that if he had been on military service outside the country he would have been entitled to a special vote. [24] Presently speculation is rife that the election day will be between 25 March and 6 May 2009. In terms of section 49 of the Constitution it must be held before or on the 12th July 2009. [25] The applicant stated that it was not only in his own interest, but in the interest of all South Africans in his position that this application be dealt with on an urgent basis and he stated that by reason of the fact that the Constitutional Court must confirm an order of invalidity before that order has any force (as is provided for in section 167(5) of the Constitution), he had no option but to move this application on an urgent basis. It is so that, due to the vast amount of work in this Division, this application, if it was to be enrolled on the ordinary opposed motion court roll, would only have been heard after the elections have taken place. The applicant stated that if he was denied the vote due to the time constraints he would suffer irreparable harm. [26] In refusing the application for a postponement the court took into consideration that although the election date has not yet been proclaimed all the political parties were already gearing up for the election and on the 7th and 8th February 2009 the last registration of voters would take place. The legal process takes it course and cannot decide the matter overnight and needed sufficient time and opportunity to study the papers, hear the matter and to pronounce judgment. This Court deemed it necessary to hear and finalize the matter as expeditiously as possible so that the Court could refer its judgment to the Constitutional Court to deal with the matter further.