MR SMUTS
Yes, Mr Chairman, in fact when the - the Act is an outflow of the interim constitution which required the promulgation of the Act and required that contained in such Act there should be criteria to be considered by the Amnesty Committee.
	Mr Chairman, my submission is that when the criteria are weighed the Committee examining aspects such as against whom the offence was committed, innocent private individuals unconnected with the events in respect of which the applicants were retaliating, the absence of the order, of any order, the gravity of the offence, the lack of proportionality.  Weighing the criteria in sub-section 3 there is not sufficient before the Committee to find that this is an act associated with a political objective on the evidence that is available because given that the lack of reliability of that evidence, the applicants could not have satisfied the Committee.  I've already made the submission that they fail on sub-section 2 in any event.
	Mr Chairman, the absence of an order in the light of the conflict which the stated policy of the party is fatal to the application or the applicant, the rejection of the right-wing infiltration argument must, in my respectful submission, be founded upon the lack of reliability of the evidence of the applicants and once that is so, it is fatal to their case because they cannot satisfy the Committee.
	They don't qualify in terms of Section 20, sub-section 2 or Section 20, sub-section 3 and it is inescapable, with respect, then that having rejected that evidence, the Committee must dismiss these applications for amnesty.  Thank you Mr Chairman.