UNKNOWN
I don't think so, thank you.  He would like to see ...(mike turned off).
	He claims that on the 3rd of May 1994 he was in the area of the alleged incident for which his co-perpetrator is today applying for amnesty.  However, on that day he was visiting his sister and her injured child and he hopefully wanted to see what was left of his home, which he had fled.
	He was at the shebeen having a drink with friends when he heard gunshots.  He was scared and he fled again, he did not even bother to visit his home or the injured sister, he was so afraid of his political opponents.  He admits to meeting with Mr Khuzwayo, coincidentally just prior to the attack that took place on the 3rd of May 1994, but he denies having any knowledge of their plans on that day.  Mr Khuzwayo during his evidence in chief, admitted to the above and also his reasons were that they deliberately excluded Mr Khuzwayo from that particular attack namely because of his lack of firearm training and the special skills which the others possessed and which was vital on that day for the attack.
	My client was always party to the knowledge that the common enemy on the hit list included Sibiya and Mthembu, inter alia.  It was discussed at their meetings.  There was common purpose and by his own admission and in line with full disclosure he would, he admits that he would have assisted, using only a knife if necessary, if he were asked to join in that particular attack.  However, he was not included and in his opinion it was because of, he thinks it was because of his relationship to Mr Sibiya.
	Mr Chairperson, I leave it in the hands of the Members of the Committee to decide if my client, in view of the above, falls within the ambit of the Act to be granted political amnesty without having ...(intervention)