SKWEYIYA J High Court, Johannesburg (High Court) unconstitutionally failed to take account of Mr Mpofu’s age in sentencing, as is alleged. [61] The application of a right, and adherence to the dictates of section 28 when sentencing a child,37 are clearly constitutional issues.38 And if Mr Mpofu’s claim is true then a constitutional failure arises in this case. Interests of justice [62] The question whether it is in the interests of justice to hear a matter depends on a myriad of relevant considerations. Mr Mpofu relies on section 28 of the Constitution, and he argues that, because of the public importance of the issue, the interests of justice require that this application for leave to appeal be granted. [63] The importance of the issue is indeed a highly relevant factor in determining the interests of justice. However, Mr Mpofu has failed to establish that the right is engaged at all. Whether or not section 28 of the Constitution has indeed been implicated can only be established by resolving the factual dispute as to Mr Mpofu’s age. To base the interests of justice on his status as a child would be to beg the question. 37 Section 28 of the Constitution demands that children are accorded different treatment in sentencing. A failure to do so is, in my view, a constitutional failure. See above n 36 for the full text of section 28(1)(g). 38 Section 167(7) of the Constitution provides: “A constitutional matter includes any issue involving the interpretation, protection or enforcement of the Constitution.” 27