99. Concerning the unconstitutionality of the impugned law, the Court notes that Article 77 of the Ivorian Constitution provides that: “The laws can, before their promulgation, be referred to the Constitutional Council by the President of the National Assembly or by one-tenth at least of the Deputies or by the parliamentary groups. The associations of the defense of the Rights of Man legally constituted can equally refer to the Constitutional Council the laws concerning the public freedoms. The Constitutional Council decides in a time period of fifteen days counting from its seizing.” 100. The Court observes that the impugned law does not relate to public freedoms and that, for that reason, the Applicant could not refer it to the Constitutional Council for determination of its conformity with the Constitution. 101. The Court further observes that the Constitutional Council of the State of Céte d’lvoire has already ruled on the constitutionality of the impugned Decision on the Application filed by Mr. Kramo KOUASSI group of 29 parliamentarians of the National Assembly law in its acting on behalf of a (supra, paragraph 18). The Constitutional Council held that the impugned provisions were in conformity with the Constitution. 102. In the circumstances, expect nothing from it is clear that the Applicant the Constitutional Council with in the instant case respect could to its prayer for annulment of the impugned law. 24 — ) 4 CLE H Cee Y) &