MR MAPOMA
I submit, sir, that his testimony is credible, because he acknowledges, and he has given a clear account of events that took place during that day, which led to the killing of the deceased persons, I mean the deceased who are subject of this hearing now.
	He goes to the extent of admitting that he himself is one of the persons who killed Blanko.   If he was not a credible witness, sir, he was at will to deny that particular aspect of his evidence.   That in itself, sir, impacts strongly in appreciating his credibility as an honest person.
	He has also been honest that when they formed the SDU's, they were together with the SDU members, who were adults, and as adults they thought that they're going to teach them discipline, because they were adult persons.  Whereas he was in hostility with them, but such hostiles can be explained at the stage, but initially he was honest with  them and there arose that later on, the hostilities.
	Otherwise, all in all, sir, I won't deal with, piecemeal with his evidence, but I just want to say his credibility is quite outstanding in the accounts that he has made.
	That's all, Chairperson, and it is my submission, sir, all in all, that, well I won't take it much, the question of full disclosure, sir, but I submit that the act of killing the deceased persons by the applicants was not an act associated with political motivation or political objective in terms of the Act.