JUSTICE IN ZIMBABWE 77 ____________________________________________________________________ The applicant’s contention was that the election should be conducted in terms of the Electoral Law passed by Parliament (i.e. the Electoral Act), as required by s 28(4) of the Constitution, and not in terms of regulations promulgated by the incumbent President under s 158 of the Electoral Act. Section 28 of the Constitution provides that the President is to be elected by voters registered on the common roll and that the nomination of candidates for the presidential election “shall be as prescribed in the Electoral Law.” Section 113 of the Constitution defines “Electoral Law” as “the Act of Parliament having effect for the purposes of s 58(4) which is for the time being in force.” Section 58(4) provides that “An Act of Parliament shall make provision for the election of members of Parliament, including elections for the purpose of filling casual vacancies.” What all this meant, in Sandura JA’s opinion, was that the legislation that comprised the Electoral Law must be an Act of Parliament. That Act of Parliament is the Electoral Act [Chapter 2:01]. Counsel for the applicant contended that, in terms of the Constitution, Parliament did not have the power to delegate to any person its constitutional function to make the Electoral Law. The power given by Parliament to the President to amend the Electoral Law by regulations in terms of s 158 of the Electoral Act was therefore unconstitutional. Sandura JA considered that this submission appeared to have merit, but the issue was not to be determined at that stage because the sole question was whether the applicant had legal standing. It was well established, Sandura JA said, that the right to the protection of the law enshrined in s 18(1) of the Constitution includes the right to due process of the law. The entitlement of every person to the protection of the law embraces the right to require the legislature to pass laws that are consistent with the Constitution. In terms of s 32(1) of the Constitution the legislature consists of the President and Parliament, Any person who is adversely affected by a law passed by the legislature that is inconsistent with the Declaration of Rights, has legal standing to challenge the constitutionality of that law by bringing an application directly to Supreme Court in terms of s 24(1) of the Constitution. In the present case the applicant had the right to demand that the presidential election be conducted in terms of the Electoral Law passed by Parliament as required by