SKWEYIYA J [230] The consideration by the High Court of the other four provisions that were in bill form is far more troubling. Only this Court may enquire into the constitutionality of a bill.20 This enquiry is limited in two respects. First, the bill must be referred by the President pursuant to section 79(4) of the Constitution, or by a Premier pursuant to section 121 of the Constitution, to this Court for consideration. Second, as this Court stated in the Liquor Bill case in relation to a request pursuant to section 79(4), it can only consider reservations that the President has expressed.21 Moreover, as was made clear by this Court in UDM: “This power of abstract judicial review is exceptional and something quite distinct from the power, having found an enactment inconsistent with the Constitution, to strike it down and to grant appropriate consequential relief relating to its effect”.22 This Court concluded that “on a proper reading of the Constitution, no court may, save as provided in [sections] 79 and 121, consider the constitutionality of a Bill before the National Assembly or a provincial legislature.”23 (My emphasis.) The difficulties inherent in resolving irrelevant constitutional issues 20 Section 167(4)(b) of the Constitution states: “Only the Constitutional Court may— (b) decide on the constitutionality of any parliamentary or provincial Bill, but may do so only in the circumstances anticipated in section 79 or 121”. 21 Ex parte President of the Republic of South Africa: In re Constitutionality of the Liquor Bill [1999] ZACC 15; 2000 (1) SA 732 (CC); 2000 (1) BCLR 1 (CC) at para 16. See also Van Straaten v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others [2009] ZACC 2 (unreported) at para 4. 22 President of the Republic of South Africa and Others v United Democratic Movement (African Christian Democratic Party and Others Intervening; Institute for Democracy in South Africa and Another as Amici Curiae) [2002] ZACC 34; 2003 (1) SA 472 (CC); 2002 (11) BCLR 1164 (CC) at para 26. 23 Id. 116