MADLANGA J to the formulation of the basis for a temporary withholding of notification pales when regard is had to the egregious infringement at issue. [149] It is thus appropriate to read-in provisions that provide for post-surveillance notification as the default position. Automatic review [150] I do not think it would be appropriate to order that – during the period of suspension – there must be automatic review. First, I have noted that automatic review is a safeguard worth considering; I did not conclude that it must be included in RICA. Second, the interim reading-in of an automatic review mechanism is complex. For example, we do not know how many surveillance directions are executed over what period. Therefore, we have no idea what load of automatic reviews a designated Judge or designated Judges would have to attend to. Nor do we know what additional resources may be necessary. In the circumstances, I do not think it appropriate to allow automatic review in the interim. Lawyers and journalists [151] Save for some minor adjustments, the interim relief granted by the High Court in respect of interception or surveillance directions affecting practising lawyers and journalists is appropriate. The rest of the issues [152] In respect of the remaining issues, I take the view that interim relief should not be granted. Costs [153] The High Court held that “[i]n keeping with the character of the controversy and the conventions in this genre of litigation, there shall be no order as to costs”. The applicants seek their costs and are appealing against this. They claim that this is a 77