NGCOBO J desire to perform its duty to uphold the Constitution and to implement the provisions of section 28(2) by providing appropriate remedies. The manner in which the court set about providing these remedies, however, was not appropriate. The remedy lay, not in attempting to recast the statute book, but in the proper interpretation and implementation of the invalidated provisions. There was no legal basis for the orders made by the High Court in paragraphs 12 and 13 of its order. Supervisory order in paragraph 14 [187] The supervisory order in paragraph 14 of the order of the High Court was made in order to give effect to the declaratory and mandatory orders. This is a matter to which I shall return in a moment. [188] For all these reasons, the High Court should not have made these orders in paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of its order. These orders must accordingly be set aside. [189] That, however, is not the end of the matter. As pointed out above, the record contains some disturbing information concerning the availability of intermediaries, the adequacy of their training and the lack of court facilities for child complainants in sexual offence cases. Indeed, grave concerns were expressed in the course of the hearing in this Court over this situation. This has serious consequences for the protection that both section 28(2) of the Constitution and the child protection 94