MHLANTLA J [35] While the Minister understood the source of her power to be the BDM Policy, the applicants contend that the Regulations confer the necessary power on the Minister to determine the analogue switch-off. The Regulations merely state that the analogue switch-off date will be published by the Minister. It does not confer the power on the Minister to determine the analogue switch-off date. Similarly, the BDM Policy states that the Minister will announce the analogue switch-off date after engaging with Cabinet. The Regulations and the BDM Policy, therefore, presuppose that the Minister has the necessary power to determine the analogue switch-off date. In my view, this power is located within the Minister’s original constitutional policy-making powers, which is section 85(2)(c) of the Constitution. This section empowers the Minister to develop and implement national policy – this much was undisputed. [36] The determination of the analogue switch-off date is the implementation of the BDM Policy by the Minister. In my view, the Minister’s exercise of power when determining the analogue switch-off date is thus executive in nature. Appropriate judicial deference should therefore be shown by this Court. The question is then whether the Minister exercised this power rationally and lawfully. [37] The classification of power as an executive function does not mean that there are no constraints placed upon it.41 In Democratic Alliance,42 this Court held that “[i]t cannot be suggested that a decision that would be irrational in an administrative law setting might mutate into a rational decision if the decision being evaluated was an executive one”.43 41 SARFU above n 39 at para 148. 42 Democratic Alliance v President of the Republic of South Africa [2012] ZACC 24; 2013 (1) SA 248 (CC); 2012 (12) BCLR 1297 (CC). 43 Id at para 44. 18