MR MALAN
Mr Panday, frankly I don't understand this track of argument.  The applicant did not kill, physically kill the victim, the deceased.  The only order that you ever led evidence about was the order to shoot with a gun that failed to shoot, for the rest it was participation and a process, at best a common purpose doctrine thing, as the court indeed did find.  The court never found any orders and there was no order ever in evidence, other than relating to the failed shooting.  Is the argument not, if there's an argument, should it not simply be based on the applicant being a supporter of the ANC, really believing that he was promoting the causes and leave it at that?  I don't understand why you argue the order stuff.