ZONDI AJ rational explanation, the Minister contends that section 18 is irrational in so far as it imposes a time-bar on the second category of sexual offences. [36] As for remedy, the Minister contends that the applicants‘ rights, and those of others in their position, will be fully vindicated by confirming the High Court‘s order. But he says no prejudice will be caused by the suspended declaration coupled with an interim reading-in which is consonant with this Court‘s approach in Gaertner.23 Lastly, the Minister opposes the costs appeal by the Estate. Fifth respondent’s submissions [37] The TBC focuses on the state‘s higher duty to protect children, particularly in ―silent communities‖ and ―failed systems of care‖. [38] The TBC avers that the state‘s duty in section 7(2) of the Constitution encompasses a duty24 ―to take legislative and other measures to protect vulnerable groups, such as children, from the violation of their rights‖, taking into account that the child‘s best interests is of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child.25 The TBC argues that despite the operation of the Children‘s Act26 and SORMA, which seek to protect children from maltreatment, neglect, abuse, and degradation, the state has failed to ensure the constitutional validity of section 18 in recognition of the child‘s right to be protected from these horrors, or alternatively, has failed to develop section 18(f) adequately in line with the values of the Constitution. 23 Gaertner v Minister of Finance [2013] ZACC 38; 2014 (1) SA 442 (CC); 2014 (1) BCLR 38 (CC) at paras 82-5. 24 In Christian Education South Africa v Minister of Education [2000] ZACC 11; 2000 (4) SA 757; 2000 (10) BCLR 1051 (CC) at para 40 this Court emphasised that the state is ―under a constitutional duty to take steps to help diminish the amount of public and private violence in society generally and to protect all people and especially children from maltreatment, abuse or degradation‖. See also Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom [2000] ZACC 19; 2001 (1) SA 46 (CC); 2000 (11) BCLR 1169 (CC) at para 78 where this Court held that ―[t]his obligation would normally be fulfilled by passing laws and creating enforcement mechanisms for the maintenance of children, their protection from maltreatment, abuse, neglect or degradation, and the prevention of other forms of abuse of children‖. 25 Section 28 of the Constitution. 26 38 of 2005. 16