UNKNOWN
Just one or two things, Mr Chairman.
	My learned friend can't have his cake and eat it.  The learned judge in the judgment of the Bahai Faith Church specifically said that Mandla Palapala was an unsatisfactory witness and the only evidence that he was prepared to rely on was to do with the robbery of the motor vehicle and things that flowed from that.  If that is the evidence that was accepted by the judge in that Court, part of that evidence was the fact that they went to Jimmy Jones alias Xholile Tjabane after the incident had taken place.  And that flies in the face of what that witness has testified here before the Commission.
	The other thing is, with respect, Mpahlele's evidence isn't just in broad terms, he specifically stated that this mission was reported to him, he specifically stated that these people regarded the instructions that they had given as lawful.  And in that regard I refer you to page 25 at the bottom of Exhibit J.  And in addition to that, most of the testimony of Mpahlele is in direct conflict to that which Tjabane has come and brought before this Commission.
	Now Mpahlele was free and was in fact subpoenaed to come and testify.  If he wanted to say anything different to what was in this record, well then he should have come and said it and he hasn't.  In those circumstances we have his sworn testimony before the High Court, and the learned judge in that Court did not reject that testimony.  The finding that he made at the end of the day was based on legal principles.  He said he basically accepted that there was an order that was given, but he said that on the legal, based on law the accused should have regarded that instruction as being manifestly unlawful, not that they did, that they should have.  And it is for that reason that they were found guilty.
	At the end of the day, Mr Chairman, the fact of the matter is that they carried out instructions in line with APLA's policy, that those instructions were communicated to the Chief of Operations, that the Chief of Operations knew that they  did not know that the armed struggle was suspended, and that the Chief of Operations said he found nothing unlawful or out of line with APLA's policy in what they had done.  In other words, they had furthered the aims of APLA.  And those are my submissions.