MR WILLS
Yes, thank you Mr Chairperson.  Basically Mr Visser has given the evidence from his client's perspective.  I submit that much of what he says is contested by ourselves.  I don't think it would be appropriate for me to go through every aspect of what is contested.  I am alive to the fact that you're going to be referring to the transcripts of the proceedings and much will come to your attention therein, but there are certain things that I think are important for me to highlight.  	First is that it is clear that our position is that we dispute that Ndaba was an informer.  We submit that Ndaba was arrested on the 7th, he was tortured to release names, it was then that Vula, that the planning around Vula became known to the Security Police.  They then decided to go up to Pretoria and take further instruction.  They got specific orders from Gen van der Merwe and this is common cause that further arrests should be delayed until the week commencing the 16th of July.  These orders were not adhered to.  The - our version is that they were deliberately not adhered to through reasons of personal ill will and malice towards those who'd been arrested.  The version for the applicants is that, as given by Mr Visser, that circumstances concerning Gen Nyanda were such that he was alive to the fact that he was being followed and hence was likely to escape unless they acted.  We dispute that.  Our version is that further, sorry, as a result of the evidence that was given, it's common cause that it was in the knowledge of both Col Botha and Gen Steyn that prosecutions would not proceed and that as a result of the fact that these people were already held, they acted and killed these people in the full knowledge that prosecutions wouldn't proceed.
	There is a certain amount of dispute about the way the executions occurred.  That in short, summarises our dispute to the application on the facts so far.