O’REGAN J and SACHS J [86] It is clear from the earlier discussion50 in relation to the threshold question concerning privacy, that although section 20(1)(aA) breaches the right to privacy, it does not reach into the core of privacy, but only touches its penumbra. In the circumstances, therefore, it is less difficult for the state to establish that the limitation is justifiable. Counsel for the state acknowledged that the suppression of commercial sex cannot be justified merely on the basis of enforcing a particular view of morality. He contended, however, that the prohibition seeks to curb the extent of prostitution in South Africa for eight reasons: (a) prostitution in itself is degrading to women; (b) it is conducive to violent abuse of prostitutes both by customers and pimps; (c) it is associated with and encourages the international trafficking in women, which South Africa is obliged by its international law commitments to suppress; (d) it leads to child prostitution; (e) it carries an intensified risk of the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, especially HIV/AIDS; (f) it goes hand in hand with high degrees of drug abuse; (g) it has close connections with other crimes such as assault, rape and even murder; and (h) it is a frequent and persistent cause of public nuisance. 50 See paras 80-4. 59