CHAIRPERSON
Let me put this to you.  You see one of the problems that the nation faced at the time of the promulgation of the statute was that there had been massive gross violation of human rights.  Victims had no idea how and when it occurred, they didn't know the truth.  The primary purpose of the Act is to uncover the truth and in doing so it encourages the perpetrators to come forward so that the victims can learn if the truth is spoken - what happened to their loved ones, the circumstances under which they died.  Should we not find an interpretation that would be consistent with this policy of the Act?  An interpretation which would be consistent with the policy of the Act, ensuring that perpetrators come before the TRC rather than obstructing them from coming to the TRC.  Isn't that the policy which one should have in mind in trying to give meaning to these provisions?