MR JANSEN
Mr Chairman, again I will just place on record that it is regrettable that the submissions or the factual allegations contained therein wasn't at least made by way of affidavit, because clearly in the form it presently is it surely can have no probative value at all.  Be that as it may, even if it does come by way of affidavit it is merely a matter of argument and we will deal with it in our argument.
	Also if I may be permitted just to place another matter on record.  In terms of section 39, more specifically subsection (c) thereof, these proceedings are regarded by the Act as being on the same footing as that of a court of law insofar as its rules of contempt is concerned, and that includes the rules relating to sub judice.  It came to our attention that this morning on the media certain statements were made by another witness, a Mr Mamasela, in the same vein as is contained in these submissions.  I would respectfully request you to remind the press and the media that although generally commissions, the rules relating to sub judice as not as strict, that they do apply to this Commission, and that they should be very circumspect in 
23.1 - 1A	commenting/...
MR JANSEN	279
commenting on the truthfulness or the untruthfulness of any evidence at this stage.  Thank you, Mr Chairman.