{"issue_text":"Whether the applicant has established a prima facie right to privacy that would be invaded by publication of her photograph in the voters' roll","issue_type":"constitutional","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Applicant's Facebook activity, threats received, photograph linkage to personal details"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the requirements for an interim interdict have been satisfied","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Prima facie right, irreparable harm, balance of convenience, absence of alternative remedy"}
{"issue_text":"Whether section 9(c) of the Electoral (Voter Registration) Regulations, 2017 is ultra vires section 57 of the Constitution","issue_type":"constitutional","dispositive":"no (reserved for final determination)","related_facts":"Constitutional privacy rights vs electoral regulations"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicant, a registered voter who actively uses Facebook under a pseudonym, sought an interim order to prevent publication of a voters' roll containing her photograph, arguing it would violate her constitutional right to privacy under section 57 and expose her to security threats due to her political activism on social media.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases