MADLANGA J [60] Second, considering the centrality of the designated Judge in the application of RICA and in the matrix of statutes regarding surveillance,90 the lack of an empowering provision in RICA, if there be, is potentially catastrophic. It is thus also in the interests of justice for this issue to be raised mero motu. [61] The question whether RICA empowers the Minister to designate a Judge “is apparent on the papers”.91 In the face of the challenge that the designated Judge lacks independence because of, inter alia, the manner of designation and concerns around the Judge’s term, one cannot avoid asking: where is the designation provided for and what does it stipulate? For that reason, the question of the existence of the power is a perfect candidate for being raised by the Court mero motu on the papers before us.92 And I cannot conceive of any prejudice that may be suffered by any of the parties.93 This is especially so here as the parties were afforded an opportunity to address us on the issue. [62] In terms of section 1 of RICA “‘designated Judge’ means any Judge of a High Court discharged from active service under section 3(2) of the Judges’ Remuneration and Conditions of Employment Act [47 of 2001], or any retired Judge, who is designated by the Minister to perform the functions of a designated Judge for purposes of [RICA]”. This definition indicates that RICA meant to empower the Minister to designate a Judge. That this is so is strengthened by the reference in other legislation to the “Judge designated by the Minister of Justice for the purposes of [RICA]”.94 However, there is only mention of designation in the section 1 definition and nothing in 90 As will be seen later, other statutes rely for authorisations of surveillance under them on a judge designated in terms of RICA; the other statutes cross-refer to RICA in this regard. That means if we are to hold that the Minister does not have the power to designate a Judge, that will affect surveillance under those statutes as well. 91 Compare CUSA above n 86 at para 68. 92 Director of Public Prosecutions, Transvaal above n 83 at paras 40-1. 93 Id at para 42; see also Everfresh Market Virginia (Pty) Ltd v Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd [2011] ZACC 30; 2012 (1) SA 256 (CC); 2012 (3) BCLR 219 (CC) at para 27. 94 See, for example, section 35 of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act 38 of 2001. Further examples will be discussed below. 38