8 Judgment No. CCZ 3/18 Constitutional Application No. CCZ 15/18 WHETHER THE APPLICANTS COULD FILE THEIR MAIN APPLICATION WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING DIRECT ACCESS Mr Mukwazhe had argued that s 167(5) of the Constitution allowed the applicants to file the main application “with or without leave”. The applicants’ understanding of s 167(5) of the Constitution was that a litigant had an option to either seek leave or approach the Court directly without first seeking and obtaining leave to do so. Section 167(5) of the Constitution provides as follows: “(5) Rules of the Constitutional Court must allow a person, when it is in the interests of justice and with or without leave of the Constitutional Court — (a) to bring a constitutional matter directly to the Constitutional Court; (b) to appeal directly to the Constitutional Court from any other court; (c) to appear as a friend of the court.” Section 167 of the Constitution prescribes the jurisdiction of the Court. The Court has original, concurrent, exclusive and appellate jurisdiction on constitutional matters only. As a result, it decides only constitutional matters and issues connected with decisions on constitutional matters. The Court makes the final decision whether a matter is a constitutional matter or whether an issue is connected with a decision on a constitutional matter. Constitutional matters over which the Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction are specifically set out in s 167(2) of the Constitution. The other provisions of the Constitution on constitutional matters or issues in connection with a decision on a constitutional matter for the hearing and determination of which direct access to the Court is guaranteed are found in ss 113(7), 131(8)(b), 175(3), 175(4) and para 9(2) of the Fifth Schedule.