UNKNOWN
Madam Chair, it is clear from the evidence which has been led on behalf of the applicant, that the act committed on the 11th of August 1993, was committed on instructions from the command of the then Unit Commander of the SDU's in Diepkloof.
	It is further clear that the intention of the Unit wherein applicant was, was solely to disarm Police Officials and not to harm or kill in order to enforce and to arm the SDU's in protecting the community from the attacks of the IFP and SAP.  The objective sought to be achieved, was simply to disarm and to protect the community.
	On the basis of that, I submit humbly that the action committed, was political.  I further submit that it is clear from the evidence which has been led, that the applicant is not the one who opened fire and apparently the fire went off as a result of a struggle.
	The intention was not to go and kill these people.   This was not a premeditated thing to go and kill.  That is also that appeared during the cross-examination of Mr Nkuna who clearly stated that the person was armed, the person who ran after the deceased, was armed with a shotgun which it was a palm gun, and that corroborates the evidence of the applicant to say I was armed with a Makarov pistol and not with a palm gun, which was armed by one comrade Xolani, who then during the struggle, the shot went off.
	Under this circumstances, I submit that a proper case has been made out and that the applicant be granted amnesty in respect of all the offences that he has been convicted of, including that one of robbery of a firearm of a Police Official, which he was not convicted of.  However, there was evidence that the firearm was taken by force from the deceased and it was handed to the SDU.  Thank you Madam Chair.