Judgment No. CCZ 4/18 17 Case No. CCZ 3/18 beyond the borders of Zimbabwe, it follows that no voter’s roll can exist outside the 210 constituencies into which Zimbabwe is divided for voting purposes. It should be noted that the residency requirement does not affect only the diaspora vote, since it also affects those who live in Zimbabwe. For example, a person who has ceased to live in Mount Pleasant for the relevant period will not be allowed to vote in Harare North elections notwithstanding that they still live in Zimbabwe, albeit in a different constituency, eg. Harare West. In this regard, the residency requirements are not directed only at the diaspora vote. In any event, the applicant’s case was premised on an interpretation of the constitutional provisions in question that allowed for the diaspora vote and made them eligible to vote. Their case is not based on a challenge to the constituency-based nature of our electoral system. Such a challenge can, in my view, only be mounted in the context of lobbying the Legislature to amend the Constitution so as to allow the diaspora vote. This is in fact what the respondents in casu urge the applicants to do. However, given that a determination contrary to their interpretation of the Constitution has been made, I find that the proverbial rug has, so to speak, been pulled from under the applicants’ feet. This point is accordingly decided against the applicants. Whether s 72 of the Electoral Act violates s 56 (1), (3) and (4) of the Constitution The constituency-based nature of the electoral system is maintained in relation to the postal vote.