MOGOENG CJ necessary to reflect more on the rationale for the suspension of a declaration of invalidity and its legal implications. [82] The suspension of the declaration of invalidity draws its force from the Constitution and has a purpose to serve. Section 172 provides for it in these terms: “(1) When deciding a constitutional matter within its power, a court— ... (b) may make an order that is just and equitable, including— ... (ii) an order suspending the declaration of invalidity for any period and on any conditions, to allow the competent authority to correct the defect.” [83] The suspension of the declaration of invalidity is meant “to allow the competent authority to correct the defect”. But, it is not merely about allowing for the correction of the defect. There is a vital connection between the nature of the defect that lies at the heart of the declaration of invalidity and the need to suspend the order of invalidity. The particular nature of the defect is critical to the decision to suspend. The overriding consideration should always be whether the nature of the defect is such that the enjoyment of benefits provided for by the invalidated provision would cease to flow if the order of invalidity is not suspended. It would therefore be necessary to suspend an order of invalidity in circumstances where its continued operation would otherwise have a detrimental effect on the rights or interests whose enjoyment was facilitated by the invalidated provision. [84] Meaning, absent harm or prejudice to the public or any interests no suspension would be necessary. This is so because logically a suspension is triggered by negative or undesirable consequences that would otherwise flow from a failure to suspend. For example, when provisions that regulate certain processes that benefit the public like firearm or business licensing are declared constitutionally invalid but licensing must go on, then the order of invalidity must be suspended because failure to do so would 32