I think there is enabling law and that is what you have in mind. The laws enable what the constitution directs. Then there is a situation where the constitution is silent. Can enabling law be made in a such situation? Especially one that contradicts an interpretation of that silence that has been given by the court?
Methinks if the interpretation is well thought out,and grounded in some constitutional principles, then the law contradicting it would obviously be declared unconstitutional.
The subject interpretation from whatever angle you look at it asinine; it punishes candidates and disenfranchises their supporters for none of their fault. You lock them out of the race following invalidation. Why?
Same case applies to vacancy in Chairperson office. While it seems like Jubilee are ‘devolving’ his powers,and this may be the intent, the court that declares this amendment unconstitutional will be put to task to guide on the constitutional way forward and you can bet they will settle on a path no materially different from Jubilee