MR MARTINI
I say it is irrelevant, but if it is relevant, if the Committee considers it relevant, then I say in any situation which prevailed in South Africa, my submission is, which was a war, the acts would be proportional.  After all, it was not a conventional war.  The Truth and Reconciliation Commission itself found that the war came into South Africa.  And in such circumstances as in Rafollo's case, which I quote in my Heads, in a war situation which prevailed in South Africa, which was an abnormal situation, maybe it is justified to kill a political opponent, but one would never, generally, in a civilised society justify the killing of a political opponent if there was no general war prevailing,  or circumstances prevailing at the time.
	That's why in my Heads, Members of the Committee, I say the Committee must attempt to judge the applicants in this case, Mr van Zyl, for the deeds and try and judge them at the time that prevailed 12 years ago, not today in a democratic society where we can reflect and say well, the deed was terrible, to think of killing somebody was a terrible thing.  One's got to attempt to place itself in the applicant's position at the time.  And at the same time my submission is, even if proportionality does become relevant, which is not a requirement, the deeds of the applicant, the acts were proportional to the overall objective that the CCB attempted to achieve.  After all it was breaking of a window to the elimination of an individual and it was, to put it as Gen Webb's version was, not total destruction, maximal disruption of the enemy.