DR PRETORIUS
Learned Commissioners in this particularcase, and here I could also refer to section 29(3) of the Actthere are two interests which must constantly be borne in mind. We cannot anticipate the findings of this Committee and the possibilityof a prosecution is always there.  The integrity of the prosecutionmust always be protected and that is my respectful submissionin this regard.  There are five applicants in this case, fiveapplicants for amnesty.  We don't know exactly what their
2A cases/...
36
cases will be. We don't know whether there will be any omissionsin their cases, defects in their cases, we don't know whetherit is necessary at this stage that any of the State witnessesbe exposed.  
 My submission is that there is a middle-of-the-road option. As my learned friend conceded there is this middle-of-the roadoption which can be used.  Let us first hear the case for theapplicants to, at this stage, say that the people must be subpoenaedcan damage the prosecution's interest.  And that is our submission.
 There is another danger which should be just mentioned in a generalsense.  If there's a grouping that feels that they want to applyfor amnesty they can decide in anticipation to blame only oneperson and to blacken this person's name to such an extent thatthe possibility for a prosecution in future is so remote becausethat person has already been discredited in another forum andthe blame has been loaded onto his shoulders entirely.  So thatis a danger which you must constantly bear in mind, that if youhave a grouping of conspirators or co-conspirators they may thendecide to lower the blame onto one of the State witnesses so thatthis could minimalise the possibility for a prosecution in future. And for that reason it is premature, because we are not yet awareof what the applicants are going to say, whether it will merelybe a repetition and whether the State witnesses will be able tomake any substantial contribution to this amnesty application.