JUDGE PILLAY
Is it correct that he wants to cross-examine Mr Ismail on the contents of the Section 29 statement, because I thought he submitted that at the time of the ruling he was unable to refer to passages in that document, but since then Mr McBride has testified and he elucidated on certain aspects.  He now wants to cross-examine Mr Ismail on those aspects as a result of the information gained from Mr McBride, nothing to do with Section 29 statement. That's how I understand it.