The SA Hunters and Game Conservation Association applied for an interim interdict, declaring that all firearm licences obtained under 1969 firearms legislation remain valid until the outcome of their application to have certain sections of the Firearms Control Act declared unconstitutional.

The association maintained that Schedule 1 of the new act, which deals with transitional arrangements, was unreasonable, unjustifiably curtailed the rights of firearm owners and was unconstitutional.

Schedule 1 provided for a five-year transitional period, ending on 1 July, where existing firearm licences would be renewed.

After this those who did not renew their licences would be given a final opportunity to dispose of their firearms, or face criminal charges, carrying a prison sentence of up to 15 years.

Only half of the about 700 000 firearm licence applications had been dealt with so far, while more than a million legal firearm owners had not yet applied for the renewal of their licences.

Counsel for the association, Bertus Bergenthuin, said the police had made it quite clear that legal firearm owners who did not re-apply would "suffer" from next Tuesday and would definitely be prosecuted.

"It's naive to think that within the next five days about a million firearm owners will either hand in their firearms or apply for temporary authorisation (which has in any event already expired). That's why an interim order is needed," he said.

Counsel for the minister of police, Jan Ellis SC, said on Wednesday it was not as if new legislation had been forced onto the public in one foul swoop.

It was gradually phased in over five years and it would be an exceptionally dangerous thing to now upset that system.

He said the court was in effect being asked to amend an act of Parliament, pending the finalisation of the constitutional application, as the interim order would effectively extend the five-year period laid down by the act.

He argued it would also be disastrous for those who had not applied, as it would lull them into a false sense of security that they need not apply or hand in their firearms.

"We say there's no need for the urgent application... It's going to cause more problems in administering the act, because it will send out the message that the public need not dispose of their firearms," Ellis said.

"There's nothing illogical or unfair in the transitional provisions of the act. The applicants have been deafeningly silent on what other possible transitional arrangements there could be."

Ellis said argument that the SA Police Service was unable to cope with the flood of disposals that was expected between now and Tuesday was mere speculation.

He pointed out that the police would afford a person whose application had been turned down a further 90 days, after all legal remedies had been exhausted, to dispose of the firearm, but Bergenthuin said there was no such provision in the act.

Judge Bill Prinsloo said he hoped to deliver judgement late on Friday morning.