MADLANGA J concerning the period of retention. It held that it is difficult for a court to second guess Parliament’s choice of the period.33 It upheld the challenge on the management of information issue.34 [19] Fourth, the applicants contended that RICA fails to provide any special protections where the intended subject of surveillance is a practising lawyer or journalist. The High Court agreed. It highlighted the importance of legal privilege which is enjoyed by the client, not the lawyer. It noted: the reality – giving examples35 – that the surveillance of a practising lawyer’s communications may be justified; that there may be the “inadvertent disclosures” of the lawyer’s clients’ communications; and that RICA does not give special attention to the reality that these inadvertent disclosures may occur.36 The High Court rejected the applicants’ plea for the involvement of an intermediary who could “filter out these inadvertent disclosures”.37 However, it held that at the very least the fact that the intended subject of the surveillance is a lawyer should be brought to the attention of the designated Judge. [20] About journalists, the High Court held that it is axiomatic to the exercise of investigative journalism to keep journalists’ sources secret. It further held that it is a necessary dimension of the right to freedom of expression – in particular freedom of the press – that journalists’ sources be protected from prying. A purposive interpretation of section 16 of the Constitution which guarantees this right enjoins us – continued the High Court – to recognise this dimension. And that has the effect of fostering and not denuding38 the role of the media. The High Court also held – in essence – that the right 33 Id at para 95. 34 Id at order 4. 35 Examples are: where the lawyer is the suspected subject of criminality, including defrauding clients, or where the lawyer’s client is the target of surveillance. 36 High Court judgment above n 8 at para 120. 37 Id at para 121. 38 See Bosasa Operation (Pty) Ltd v Basson 2013 (2) SA 570 (GSJ) at para 38. 18