MR PRETORIUS
That is the evidence.  This witness stated as from line 11 and further, that he in fact shot to kill.  If one looks at his amnesty applications, in particular paragraph 2 thereof on page 9.a.ii on page 114, in his amnesty application this witness stated that he was involved in an operation which he terms
"This relates to the assisination of Brigadier Malope in August 1996.  He was shot in his house in Mobopane and AK47 assault rifles were used, he died".
The particular point that I would like to make and I'll take that further with regard to the application and more in particular on page 115, the top thereof that is paragraph 10(b), more in particular the last 2 lines of that sentence:  "and committed under the orders of my commanders and with the approval of the organisation".  Now that refers to the ANC Mr Chairman.  Now what this indicates if one takes the line right throughout, that firstly an assasination as we full well know has got nothing to do with protecting yourself physically or any other wise, we all know what the word assasination means.  It then goes that he did that with the approval of the ANC.  
	We then further know that on page 3574 he testified that he shot to kill.  It is true, I'm not placing it out of context that in there he said that it was in a defense situation, but his aim was he shot to kill.  Taking all that into regard and also taking into regard that it is the position of the objectors that no attack took place and that there was no reason to fire, also taking into regard that it was repeatedly placed on record the fact that in so far as the ANC was concerned, they treasured human life and human right etc and would not have done anything but to defend the building.  Taking everything into regard that I have pointed out now, I'm going to argue at the end of the day that it is clear from, in particular this application, that it was not all that innocent and that the particular organisation was not involved in innocent acts only as is particularly placed on record and we can all see that, and therefore it is important, relating to the background, merely to put this to the witness on the basis - I may just take it one point further, if one looks at 9.b, he says that there's three people killed and twenty injured and damage to property.  Now I'm going to ask this witness with relation to those persons killed, which he stated there, these three persons killed and twenty injured, whether that relates to Shell House for instance because I get the impression it does not relate to Shell House.  If it does not relate to the Shell House incident, that indicates that there were three people killed one of which must be Brigadier Malope which we have seen in paragraph 2, then there's two other people killed and all I want to know is if he alleges that he acted in self defence when those people were killed.