MR MALAN
I am indeed, Mr Chairman.  Can I continue?
	Mr Chairman and Members of the Committee, at the start of the proceedings yesterday I didn't feel at liberty to disclose some of the views, due to the fact that I felt it might prejudice my clients' applications.  Now at the conclusion and after tendering evidence under oath, it is my conviction by making a simple and clinical analysis of the facts, that both of my clients, both applications of my clients don't fall within the ambit of Act 34/95.
	It is one of the prerequisites that an applicant must have committed a crime and acknowledge it, and throughout their evidence they persisted that they didn't commit a crime and they were merely executing their duties and I respect the fact that they played open cards with the Committee in this regard.  If there was a great miscarriage of justice in the criminal matter, it is not for this Committee, with respect, to rectify the omissions in the defence by means of this forum.  
	It was as early as our first consultation that I informed them of my opinion that they will not qualify for amnesty due to this fact.  If I'm wrong that's another story, I do not want to underestimate the powers and the discretion of this Committee to overrule my humble opinion, but I have already informed them yesterday of my opinion and I think they accept it in that way that I've explained it to them.  That is still my opinion at this point in time.  Thank you, Sir.