NGCOBO J by the High Court; and fourth, they dealt with the policy that has yet to be formulated and they were thus in breach of the doctrine of the separation of powers. [174] The legal basis for making these declaratory orders is not clear from the judgment of the High Court. The court had already made orders of invalidity in relation to the invalidated provisions as required by section 172(1)(a) of the Constitution. A court hearing a constitutional matter has wide powers to make an order that is appropriate.130 The question is whether it was appropriate for the High Court to make the declaratory orders in paragraphs 8-10. [175] As framed by the court, the question was whether the invalidated provisions are inconsistent with section 28(2) of the Constitution. The answer to this question turned upon the proper construction of section 28(2) and section 170A(1). It did not require a 130 Section 38 provides: “Anyone listed in this section has the right to approach a competent court, alleging that a right in the Bill of Rights has been infringed or threatened, and the court may grant appropriate relief, including a declaration of rights.” Section 172(1)(b) provides: “(1) When deciding a constitutional matter within its power, a court— (b) may make any order that is just and equitable, including— (i) an order limiting the retrospective effect of the declaration of invalidity; and (ii) an order suspending the declaration of invalidity for any period and on any conditions, to allow the competent authority to correct the defect.” Fose v Minister of Safety and Security [1997] ZACC 6; 1997 (7) BCLR 851 (CC); 1997 (3) SA 786 (CC) at para 19 provides: “Appropriate relief will in essence be relief that is required to protect and enforce the Constitution. Depending on the circumstances of each particular case the relief may be a declaration of rights, an interdict, a mandamus or such other relief as may be required to ensure that the rights enshrined in the Constitution are protected and enforced. If it is necessary to do so, the courts may even have to fashion new remedies to secure the protection and enforcement of these all-important rights.” (Footnote omitted.) 88