MADLANGA J [3] The first question before us is whether RICA unreasonably and unjustifiably fails to protect the right to privacy and is, therefore, unconstitutional to the extent of this failure. The High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria, answered this question in the affirmative.8 It declared that in several respects RICA is deficient in meeting the threshold required by section 36(1) of the Constitution to justify its infringement of the right to privacy, particularly considering the interplay between the privacy right and other constitutional rights protected in sections 16(1), 9 3410 and 35(5).11 More on these and other constitutional rights later. The declaration of invalidity was suspended for two years to allow Parliament to cure the defects. The High Court granted interim relief by reading-in certain provisions.12 8 Amabhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism NPC v Minister of Justice 2020 (1) SA 90 (GP). 9 Section 16(1) of the Constitution states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes— 10 (a) freedom of the press and other media; (b) freedom to receive or impart information or ideas; (c) freedom of artistic creativity; and (d) academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.” Section 34 of the Constitution provides: “Everyone has the right to have any dispute that can be resolved by the application of law decided in a fair public hearing before a court or, where appropriate, another independent and impartial tribunal or forum.” 11 Section 35(5) states: “Evidence obtained in a manner that violates any right in the Bill of Rights must be excluded if the admission of that evidence would render the trial unfair or otherwise be detrimental to the administration of justice.” 12 In its entirety the order says: “Order No 1: It is declared that: (a) RICA, including sections 16(7), 17(6), 18(3)(a), 19(6), 20(6), 21(6) and 22(7) thereof, is inconsistent with the Constitution and accordingly invalid to the extent that it fails to prescribe procedure for notifying the subject of the interception; (b) The declaration of invalidity is suspended for two years to allow Parliament to cure the defect; and (c) Pending the enactment of legislation to cure the defect, RICA shall be deemed to read to include the following additional sections 16(11), (12) and (13): ‘(11) The applicant that obtained the interception direction shall, within 90 days of its expiry, notify in writing the person who was the subject of the interception and shall certify to the designated Judge that the person has been so notified. 8