\...UII:>L. MfJfJI I I..dliUII I~U . \...\...L ::JU f l::J rather skirt and avoid the constitutional issue and resort to the available alternative remedies. ........... l ) ••• This has given birth to the doctrine of ri~en~s -~md c~~stitutional avoidance ably expounded by EBRAHIM JAin Sports and Recreation Commission v Sagittarius Wrestling Club and Anor 2001 (2) ZLR 501 (S) at p 505 G where the learned judge had this to say: "There is also merit in Mr Nherere's submission that this case should never have been considered as a constitutional one at all. Courts will not normally consider a constitutional question unless the existence of a remedy depends on it; if a remedy is available to an applicant under some other legislative provision or on some other basis, whether legal or factual, a court will usually decline to determine whether there has been, in addition, a breach of the Declaration of rights." (See also Zantsi v Council of State, Ciskei & Ors 1995 (4) SA 615 (CC). The doctrine of ripeness and constitutional avoidance gives credence to the concept that the Constitution does not operate in a vacuum or isolation. It has to be interpreted and applied in conjunction with apJ:!licable subsidiary legislation together with other available legal remedies. Where there are alternative remedies the preferred route is to apply such remedies before resorting to the Constitution. That conceptualisation of the law as previously stated finds recognition in the leading case of Catholic Commission of Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe (supra) heavily relied upon by the applicants. In that case the applicants waited until they had exhausted their alternative remedies before approaching the Constitutional Court for relief. In this case, the complaint has to do with delays in executing a court judgment. Admittedly the wheels of justice tend to turn very slowly but that is no reason for this court to prematurely intervene usurping the authority and functions of the High Court, the Supreme Court and the President under the guise of determining a constitutional issue. For that reason, this couti would rather wait until the wheels of justice have turned full circle, for doing otherwise in the circumstances of this case, would be inconsistent with this Court's status as the highest court of last resort in constitutional matters. In the interim the applicants may have J-·r:;·;=7;~;:;-;:-:·. -··--~---···· I CO;.;·~:,;"'·'' '~IP ·nr f I -., ~ .,, .., __,,J,.,, I ..._ ·•: .._. · ' 1 /(·-...~r zrnr . LPO ~,;, ; ..... .• ' I -~-