MR VAN DER MERWE
It is actually very simple. I think what at that stage happened, is that we must understand that Mr Nieuwoudt was under severe pressure from the security establishment. All of them were under pressure to apply the measures, any measure which was necessary to stop the consume boycott and unrest.  And if you had to work with someone who you knew could be the link to be able to achieve those results, and this person would appear unco-operative and be cheeky for that matter, it is obvious that a person in those circumstances might get cross, but this is not a personal thing.
	This isn't something personal for his own personal gain.  This was, he was being frustrated at the fact that the person who would be able to provide the solution to the problem, was unco-operative, and in that way he described him as cheeky, but that is, I think - the Committee witnessed Mr Jack's attitude today, and I think he said he was cheeky at that stage with the security police. But that was the reason why Mr Nieuwoudt acted. 
	Mr Nieuwoudt had to act at that stage to be able to, let's call it through intimidation, to soften up Mr Jack in order to be able to achieve his end goal, which would be to break through to him, to be able to stop the consumer boycott.