Kaz ,why did you not present paragraph 7, any way here it is
 Article 106 of the Constitution invests in the President and the National Assembly (and implicitly in GECOM),responsibilities that impact on the precise timing of the elections which must be held.
It would not therefore be right for the Court, by the issuance of coercive orders or detailed directives, to presume to instruct these bodies on how they must act and thereby pre-empt the performance by them of their constitutional responsibilities. It is not, for example, the role of the Court to establish a date on or by which the elections must be held, or to lay down timelines and deadlines that, in principle,are the preserve of political actors guided by constitutional imperatives.
The Court must assume that these bodies and personages will exercise their responsibilities with integrityand in keeping with the unambiguous provisions of the Constitution bearing in mind that the no confidence motion was validly passed as long ago as 21 December 2018.
It does not relieve the Coalition of any of their responsibility pertaining to the constitution in light of the NCV. The court simply stated that the political actors know what has to be done so they should do it. No win in this entire ruling for the Coalition bai.