MADLANGA J exclusively party based electoral system. The submission continues that this is so because – on the applicants’ argument – this exclusively party based system would infringe the rights protected under sections 18 and 19(3)(b). The Minister’s supplementary submissions only highlighted that section 157(2) provides for two alternative systems, one exclusively party based and the other a combination of ward representation and members drawn from party lists. OUTA argued that section 157(2)(a) does not create an internal contradiction between its provisions and those of sections 18 and 19. Rather, section 157(2)(a) imposes a requirement that entails a “discrete and narrow limitation” on the rights protected by sections 18 and 19. It then made the point that this is not an isolated occurrence in the Constitution. As examples of narrow and discrete limitations OUTA mentioned: the limitation of rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights in terms of section 36 of the Constitution;106 the powers of national government to intervene in provincial administration,107 and of provincial governments to intervene in municipal matters;108 and the derogation of constitutional rights in terms of legislation enacted pursuant to a declaration of a state of emergency. In this context, OUTA is using “limitation” in the sense of intra-constitutional curbs on the full effect of certain provisions of the Constitution. OUTA then submitted that section 157(2)(a) similarly “creates a narrow limitation”. And it does so “only in the local government sphere, on the political rights entrenched in sections 18 and 19”. I am attracted to this argument. What gives it even greater force and takes me beyond mere attraction is some crucial background material. At the stage of negotiating for the attainment of democracy, there were issues that uniquely affected municipalities. As a result, negotiations in respect of municipalities 106 Section 36 is quoted later. 107 Section 100 of the Constitution. 108 Section 139 of the Constitution. 42