Judgment No. CCZ 1/2014 5 Const. Application No. SC 240/2010 applicants on remand was a violation of their right to the protection of the law under s 18(1) of the Constitution. They did not invoke the provisions of s 24(2) of the Constitution at the time they ought to have done. The applicants accepted the legality of the decision to place them on remand on the basis of which they were arraigned before the High Court in July 2009. Prima facie, in finding that there was reasonable suspicion that the applicants committed the offences with which they were charged, the magistrate did not violate the applicants’ right to personal liberty. On 25 February 2009 the High Court held in cases HC 42/09 and HC 147/09 on review that the decision of the magistrate to place the applicants on remand was based on a proper application of the principle and finding on the facts that there was a reasonable suspicion that the applicants had committed the offences of which they were charged. It is clear that s 24(2)of the Constitution was designed to enable the Supreme Court to adjudicate and consider the question whether there has been or there is likely to be a contravention of the Declaration of Rights, as a court of first instance exercising original jurisdiction. Section 24(2) provides that: “(2) If in any proceedings in the High Court or in any court subordinate to the High Court any question arises as to the contravention of the Declaration of Rights, the person presiding in that court may, and if so requested by any party to the proceedings shall, refer the question to the Supreme Court unless, in his opinion, the raising of the question is merely frivolous or vexatious.”