6 HH 359-20 HC 2534/20 which the access to information envisioned by the Act can be realized. They have a right to be protected in the practice of their profession as journalists. The balance of convenience favours the granting of the interdict sought. This is so because if the proposed accreditation proceeds on the basis of categories not provided for by law there will be irreparable prejudice to the applicants who may be excluded from certain categories. On the other hand, the respondent suffers no irremediable prejudice by proceeding in terms of the existing categories. When the law is changed it can then proceed in the manner proposed. Finally, I do not believe that there is an adequate alternative remedy available to the applicant which would achieve the result sought through the interdict. The requirements for an interim interdict have therefore been established. The draft provisional order will be amended to reflect that the interdict pertains only to accreditation based on the new categories as announced by the respondent. The respondent is at large to proceed with the accreditation based on the existing categories provided for by the legal framework in place. The reference to the violation of sections 61 and 62 of the Constitution in the terms of the final order sought will also be removed for the reasons outlined above. Finally, I must point out in relation to the section on service that the Sheriff does not require a specific statement in the order to authorize him to serve the provisional order. It is the duty of the Sheriff to serve court orders. If any other person, such as the applicant’s legal practitioner, requires a departure from that position of the law then they can seek that relief, as was done in the instant case. The reference to the Sheriff will therefore be deleted as well. In the result, the relief is granted in terms of the draft provisional order as amended, in the following terms: TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms: 1. The respondent be and is hereby ordered to accredit the applicant’s members on the basis of the accreditation categories provided for in s 79 of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act [Chapter 10:27] as read with the provisions of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy (Registration, Accreditation and Levy) Regulations, 2002 (Statutory Instrument 169C of 2002).