The President had enacted a set of regulations which, for example, excluded a detainee from having a fair trial. This implied that the President could exclude natural justice. The court held that this was a dire mistake, and that the President could not exclude procedural fairness. This decision clarifies the underlying principle which was incorrectly interpreted in the case of "Omar v Minister of Law and Order]], in which it was held that the State President, when enacting emergency regulations in terms of the Public Safety Act, could excuse the right to a hearing as well as the right of detainees to legal representatives. Another reform was the recognition of the doctrine of legitimate expectation – this came as a result of landmark case of "Transvaal v Traub", which extended the applicability of the right to be heard to cases which did not necessarily affect one's liberty, property or existing rights. The courts also recognised unreasonableness as a ground of judicial review, which was expressed in "Jacobs v Waks" and reaffirmed in "JSE v Witwatersrand Nigel Limited", where it was held that it is the function of the court to determine what was and what was not relevant to the exercise of discretionary administrative power. There were also sporadic initiatives taken by the government, but these were limited, because there was no incentive for those in power to change administrative law in any meaningful way. The South African Law Review, however, published reports in 1986 and 1992 which included draft legislation to codify judicial review. In "SA Roads Board v Johannesburg City Council", the rigid classification of functions as either administrative or legislative was rejected; instead a distinction must be drawn between   These reforms cleared the way for a new phase of administrative law reform, rooted on the principles of democratic rule and constitutional supremacy. Before 1994, South Africa had embraced the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. Now, however, the Constitution dictates that all exercises of public power be rational, justifiable and reasonable. The Interim Constitution provided a bridge from an authoritarian past to a democratic future. Section 24 of the Interim Constitution provided that every person shall have the right to   Section 33 of the final Constitution provides   Administrators must obey the law and must be authorised by the law for the decisions they make. This is the same as the principle of legality; it is the authority of an administrator to act. The administrator must obey the law, whether general or specific, and must act within his delegated powers. "Affordable Medicines Trust v Minister of Health" concerned a challenge to the validity of a licensing scheme introduced by the government.