CHAIRPERSON
Now, if we take a look at 31(3), it says
"... any incriminating answer or information obtained or incriminating evidence directly or indirectly derived from the questioning in terms of (1), shall not be admissible as evidence against the person concerned, in criminal proceedings, etc."
	 (1) says -
"... any person who is questioned by the Commission in the exercise of its powers in terms of this Act, or has been subpoenaed to give evidence, etc ..."
	wouldn't that protection in 31(3) apply to evidence given here by any applicant before us in an amnesty application and also evidence given at a Section 29 equally, whether it is being used later or not?  I am just asking, you are arguing that there is a difference between the Section 29 and the evidence that Mr McBride will be giving tomorrow?