GEORGE BIZOS
...(indistinct - no microphone) particularly by Mr Wagener who is not here, who, when asked what examples were there of anyone's life being in danger in the hundreds if not thousands of applications that have hitherto been held, some of them in places like New Brighton and other places, he was not able - none of them were able to give any specific, I'm talking about the pre-trial conference and not the application Mr Chairman, no one of them was able to give any example of any harm having come to anyone, but particularly Mr Wagener spoke at some length that he is not prepared to be subjected to toyi-toying and singing of songs, he actually mentioned one of them, that was - may be interpreted as an incitement to violence.  That is the only thing that we heard about at the pre-trial conference, Mr Chairman, but be that as it may, I want to deal with the objection made by my learned friend, Mr Wessels.
	The Committee is entitled, Mr Chairman, to hear the views of the victims or intended victims, to take them into consideration as to whether or not amnesty ought to be granted or reconciliation is to be advanced by the granting of amnesty.  The statement read properly actually says that it is the wish of or the hope of Minister Omar that the applicants will take the opportunity of doing what they did not do in their papers and the portions that were read out, Mr Chairman, the portions that were read out do not, with respect, amount to what Minister Omar was expecting, rightly or wrongly.  
	But Mr Chairman, we have a situation of a statement which has been made.  Minister Omar regrets that he could not be here this morning and I have been assured and I am sure that he will make good his promise to be here, he wants to be here and if it's not an affidavit, he is going to listen to what the applicants are saying and then it will be his prerogative to decide whether he wants to say anything more.  The purpose of the statement was, I thought, made clear Mr Chairman and that is this, that speculation may have arisen.  Why is the erstwhile Minister of Justice briefing counsel to oppose applications for amnesty, if he himself was so extensively involved in the process?  He was correctly entitled to clarify his position because the public perception might be created that he was behaving in an inconsistent manner and I submit that the statement has been read in, there is no reason to keep it out, it has been read into the record, I would ask that it should be received as Exhibit C and if my learned friends want to ask the Committee to call Minister Omar, or if he decides to give evidence, this is a matter which you can hear about in due course, but to suggest in such vociferous terms that there was anything improper in Minister Omar clarifying his position, firstly in relation to his attitude to the applications for amnesty and secondly, in relation to the matter being removed on the application of one of the parties at a time when a day or two before, there is nothing improper in it, there is no criticism of the Judge who made the order, it was merely a personal expression of how he and members of his community feel and I believe, Mr Chairman, that we should, that the Committee should accept the statement as Exhibit C and that we should proceed with the application, Mr Chairman.  Thank you.