MR MALINDI
Indeed so Chairperson.  In fact under cross examination Mr Derby-Lewis was specifically asked about the tasks, the duties that were given to him as a leader within the CP which gave him the authority to do so and his responses throughout were, as a leader, I have the authority and I don't have to consult anyone and we dispute that Chairperson and we say, as a leader of the CP, organisations designate functions to it's officials, spokesperson for justice, secretaries to organise and those functions are clearly designated to officials and no function designated to Mr Derby-Lewis goes anywhere near a suggestion that he could take a decision on his own or with Mr Walus or with Mrs Derby-Lewis to plan and execute a serious act as assassinations.
	Dr Hartzenberg himself testified that if the CP were to consider such a serious step as from moving from negotiations, participating in elections and adopting violence that that would have been an issue for discussion within the party and that was also Mrs Derby-Lewis' evidence during the trial that the party had not moved over to violence and if the party were to move over to violence, the party would have had to discuss it, it was a contingency plan.
	Chairperson, at Page 40, Paragraph 10, the question whether the act committed by the Applicants is an act associated with a political objective, Chairperson, the act envisages that if an act is committed, it will be for the benefit of a political organisation or liberation movement.  
	We have here an instance where the party says the act was not in pursuance of it's political objective.  It is our submission therefore Chairperson that even if the Applicants and their co-conspirators which were not disclosed had a political objective in their minds the Conservative Party was not aware that such an act was going to be committed on their behalf, so the act could not have been committed in the eyes of the CP with an objective of advancing it's political objectives.