CHAIRPERSON
Just one other issue which we had raised, one legal point.  Is the position not such that the applicant has to show that he acted in good faith, he acted bona fide in what he did, so that what we have to do is to look at what was available to him, look at the situation that prevailed, look at how that information impacted upon the applicant in his, in that particular context and then to consider the question whether under all those circumstances, the conclusions which he had drawn, were bona fide in good faith or not, so that you take into account not only objective, or not only subjective, but both.  You look at the overall situation, you look at his state of mind, you look at the circumstances which applied, you look at the rumour, you look at the information which is available to him, his belief that the brother was an IFP hitman and that sort of thing?
	So that what we have here is not as in the normal legal situation, as we know it, a cut and dried, either objective of subjective test, but that it is rather a combination of looking at everything, trying to come to a fair decision in all the circumstances of the case?