MR NAIDOO
I think what I am - I am glad that in certain respects my submissions here sound like a prayer.  One reason it sounds like a prayer is because I have stated that it is anathema for me to stand here.  I find it repugnable to stand here and actually argue that Brian Mitchell be released, but in doing that the purposes, the objectives of the Constitution and the Act under which this application is brought has to be considered, and I then exhort the Committee to give Brian Mitchell that chance to make amends, because he comes here having served five years in prison.  He comes here also as an individual who has also lost everything.  Yes, I would agree and concede that he has not lost as much as the victims have lost, but the whole purpose of granting of amnesty is so that one may have reconciliation.
One of the aspects that has to also be considered by the honourable Members of the Committee and you, Mr Chairman, is that the victims - or the representative of the victims has indicated that there is no opposition being advanced by the victims.  They leave it in the discretion of the Committee.  There is then an - what can be derived from this is that were there to be a release then that release would be acceptable to the victims in the spirit of reconciliation.  And this particular implication or inference may be made from the submission made to you by their legal representative in saying that at this point in time they are unable to forgive, but were the applicant to go and involve himself in the community then the door to forgiveness is still open.  And this grant of amnesty would then also assist in
	/bringing
bringing about that reconciliation.
I have no further submissions to make in this regard.