MADLANGA J The High Court dismissed the application. In doing so it focused only on the section 19(3)(b) challenge. It reasoned that nowhere does section 19(3)(b) of the Constitution expressly provide “that standing for [public] office must include standing . . . ‘as an independent candidate’ as opposed to a member of a political party”.9 It also held that other provisions of the Constitution point away from the interpretation contended for by the applicants. In this regard, it specifically referred to sections 1(d), 46(1)(a) and 105(1)(a) of the Constitution. It held that – by referring to a “multi-party system” in section 1(d) – the Constitution entrenches a party system. It also held that sections 46(1)(a) and 105(1)(a) accord Parliament a discretion to prescribe – through national legislation – an electoral system that is to apply to the National Assembly and Provincial Legislatures.10 According to the High Court, that this must be so, makes practical sense because a right to vote without a framework on the nuts and bolts on its exercise is “empty and useless”.11 I read the High Court judgment to then say the nuts and bolts require that one must stand for public office through political parties. And they make no provision for independent candidates.12 Whether there should be a framework that caters for the participation of independent candidates is best left to Parliament, something that Parliament is currently seized with.13 Based on sections 46(1)(a) and 105(1)(a), the High Court held that, at best for the applicants, the Constitution does not prohibit a system that makes it possible for independents to stand for public office. But it does not require that system. Therefore, 9 High Court judgment above n 5 at para 13. 10 These two sections apply to the National Assembly and Provincial Legislatures, respectively. 11 High Court judgment above n 5 at para 30, quoting this Court in New National Party of South Africa v Government of the Republic of South Africa [1999] ZACC 5; 1999 (3) SA 191 (CC); 1999 (5) BCLR 489 (CC) (New National Party) at para 11, where this Court stated that— “the mere existence of the right to vote without proper arrangements for its effective exercise does nothing for a democracy; it is both empty and useless.” 12 High Court judgment id. 13 Id. 5