Judgment No. CCZ 7/2014 14 Const. Application No. 41/2014 The decision on the second issue is that the facts ascertained have not established that the main application should be heard on an urgent basis. An order that a constitutional matter should be heard on an urgent basis is an extraordinary remedy designed to be granted in the clearest of cases. The principle of equality of treatment requires that a litigant whose case is pending hearing in a court must be subjected to the same procedure as is applied to others for the determination of the question whether his or her case is ready to be set down for hearing by the court. The decision that a case should be set down for hearing by the Constitutional Court is made by the Registrar. It is only in exceptional circumstances and upon an application on a certificate of urgency signed by a legal practitioner, that the Chief Justice will order that a matter should be heard on an urgent basis. A party favoured with an order for a hearing of the case on an urgent basis gains a considerable advantage over persons whose disputes are being set down for hearing in the normal course of events. A party seeking to be accorded the preferential treatment must set out, in the founding affidavit, facts that distinguish the case from others to justify the granting of the order for urgent hearing without breach of the principle that similarly situated litigants are entitled to be treated alike. The certificate of urgency should show that the legal practitioner carefully examined the founding affidavit and documents filed in support of the urgent application for facts which support the allegation that a delay in having the case heard on an urgent basis would