MOKOTEDI MPSHE
Thank you Mr Chairman, then I will pass on that incident, otherwise I am ad idem with what is stated by my learned friend, except the legal part of it.
	Mr Chairman, on incident number two, I am ad idem with my learned friend as far as the presence of the applicant is concerned.  Mr Chairman, the evidence is clear that this man, the deceased, Kanyile was not the target.
	But it should be made clear that the applicant and this is his evidence, did not shoot voluntarily or deliberately.  He said it clearly, that he was not aware that the gun was cocked, it went off by mistake.
	Let's have that scenario in mind, and get another scenario wherein the applicant says we ordered him to stop, he refused to stop and we shot him.  Let's put in that deliberate part of it.  Then, if the deliberate part of it is in and it is accepted, one can simply say and this would be correct, that they did what they did in the furtherance of their mission, it was part of their mission.
	They had to get rid of whatever obstacle and then the political jacket would also be seem to be worn by the killing of Kanyile.  But he doesn't say so, he says I was not even aware that it was cocked, it went off by mistake.  Can we still say in scenario two, the furtherance of what they were going to do, is applicable?  With respect, the answer would be in the negative.