The issues discussed with the Commission were on two phases: Firstly, the CRC needs to interpret the Constitution to determine what it requires of it, as the South African courts could not be called to interpret the relevant constitutional provisions as they do not provide advisory opinions. Furthermore, there is at present no case or controversy with which a court can be seized. Therefore, the Venice Commission would be uniquely qualified and positioned to assist in this regard. Secondly, the CRC is of the view that if a "review" of the Constitution involves, not only assessing whether or not the Constitution requires amendment, but also its "health"- including the state of its implementation and its impact in society in respect of transformation - there would be a need to develop a new methodology for such purpose. This methodology would have an enormous importance way beyond South Africa, as it could be used in other contexts in which constitutional democracy is undertaking the delicate process of consolidation within society. In certain cases, such diagnostic methodology could prevent situations in which both the country concerned and the rest of the world suddenly wake up to a situation in which a constitution has failed, or is about to fail, in its intended democratic mission or policy of transformation. The Commission would uniquely qualify and be positioned to undertake and develop this phase. However, the second phase follows the completion of the first phase. It will require a more intense co-operation between South Africa and the Commission, a relationship which would possibly be better suited to a time when South Africa acquires full membership in the Commission.