Official Journal – Issue No. 22 (bis) on 03 June 2013 5 authorities, which are considered the product of its work as the authority establishing other authorities. It is unimaginable that this authority shall be subject in its formation or the control works it practices to any of the other state authorities. Thus, overseeing it or overseeing what it issues is not included within the SCC jurisdiction. Moreover, the litigation of this court has also settled that the resolution of the President of the Republic on calling for a referendum on the constitution is among sovereignty works that are also out of the court's scope of control. Whereas State Lawsuit Authority has decided to decline the lawsuit since it is not connected to SCC as stated by its law; since the appeal examination division at the Supreme Administrative Court, preceded by State Commissioners Authority, have exceeded their jurisdictions regarding its preparation and expressing the legal opinion thereon or decide on the appeal against the ruling issued by the Administrative Court, where it declined the urgent request in the lawsuit, and has been subject with no coercion on the part of the plaintiff, since some legislative texts infringe the provisions of the constitutional declaration, and depended in this on the report of the State Commissioners' Authority in this regard. The Authority also ruled that the appellant's interest is untainted owing to the wholeness of election process of the Shura Council members prior to the issuance of the referral ruling. Whereas this rebuttal, with all its aspects, is refutable, first: based on the case law of this court that each of the substantive and constitutional lawsuits has its own subjectivity and constituents which neither mix nor combine in the conditions for their acceptance. Nevertheless, each lawsuit is independent of the other one in its subject, as well as the content of the conditions required by the law to allow its filing. The duties vested in SCC by the legislator do not include settling the conditions of the lawsuit's connection to the court of the subject pursuant to the conditions set forth before it, or its adherence to the limits of its jurisdictions set out by the law. However, its mandate is limited to the constitutional matters set forth before it, as set forth in the law of this court. Second: based on the case law of this court that the constitutional legitimacy which the SCC monitors adherence to, aims at ensuring that the legislative texts complies with the provisions of the constitution. Such legitimacy lies on top of the states legal structure, and it is also a branch of its subjection to the law; which indicates that any court or authority of a judicial jurisdiction refrain from the enforcement of a legal text that is necessary to settle its mandate or in the dispute set forth before it, in case it is clear for it, from an initial perspective, that it is contradictory to the constitution. Having such suspicion, shall accordingly oblige it to verify its validity first, through presenting it to the SCC, which the constitution tasked with settling the constitutional matters. Third: the interest in the constitutional lawsuit in examining the action is concerned only with, regarding the lawsuit referred from the trial court pursuant to article (29/a) of the SCC law No. 48/1979, the fact that the text, which a court has seen as unconstitutional, is necessary to settle the dispute presented thereto, without considering the impact of the reflection of this text on the personal interest of the plaintiff. This agrees with what is stated in the explanatory memorandum of the SCC draft law, that the consideration of a constitutional action by way of reference has targeted widening the scope thereof, to confirm the adherence of the judicial rulings to the right constitutional rules. Fourth: in case the board of commissioners at the State Council Courts realizes suspicion of a legislative text's infringement of the constitution's provisions; it shall state this in a report to be submitted to the court. In this regard, the court to which the report is submitted shall