CHAIRPERSON
If that is so, and this is just again for purposes of argument, on what basis would the Commission in terms of Section 29 refuse to allow it to be used?  Bearing in mind that what we are trying to do here is to get this, the whole story, the truth, openness and transparency, now if somebody were to come and say "look, when I went to that Section 29 hearing, I had a guy standing behind me with a gun pointed at my back and I testified under duress and whatever, you know there is some tangible reason to say no, what was said there is, was said under inducement, etc, etc.  There is some reason to exclude it.  But if somebody just comes and says well, I gave evidence at the Section 29 about the same incident, but I don't want it to be used, there is a difference there, you know.  When would the Commission put its foot down and say "no, it is not going to be used?"  Shouldn't there be some specific reason for it, to keep the documents secret?