MR WILLS
Yes, that is basically my position, and as regards the proportionality, all I can do is refer the Committee to decisions taken by other Committee members, in circumstances which with respect are far worse than the circumstances and to that extent I have a couple of reported judgements of amnesty application 4019/96 and 4058/96.
	This is the incident where, it was quite a well recorded incident where there was an attack on certain IFP members in the Table Mountain area and these two applicants were IFP members, who decided against orders of their superiors to take action in response to this attack and they attacked a minibus and the evidence was to the effect that they shot at the driver of the minibus, the minibus then went off the road.
	They had expected the persons in the minibus to be members of ANC.  When they approached the minibus, they saw and it was admitted in evidence, they saw that the people inside the minibus were women and children and they then proceeded to shoot those persons, without knowing, after having seen the person, that these were in fact ANC members.
	My understanding of that judgement is that the, and I have a copy which I can hand up, was that the offences were committed in the course of the struggles, and I am quoting from the judgement, were committed in the course of the struggles of the past and were associated with a political objective.
	To my mind, that makes the actual ambit of both proportionality and political objectives, extremely wide, and I submit in comparison with this case, it certainly is a lot wider than one would need to stretch those definitions in regard to this case.
	The persons, the applicants in that incident were Mbangu Absolom Dladla and Nkaniso Wilfred Ndlovo and the matter was heard in Durban on the 23rd of March.