GEORGE BIZOS
... the easy one in law.  There is a difference between a policeman who in the exercise of his police activities as a policeman, committed separate acts, some of which he might decide to ask for amnesty and some of which he may decide not to ask for amnesty, it does not apply where crimes are committed within the ambit of a general conspiracy by the Head of that conspiracy, Mr Chairman.  There is - the offence is, Mr Chairman, being a party to that conspiracy and the way you prove that conspiracy is what he did in pursuance of that conspiracy.
	And this business that you cannot give amnesty, Mr Chairman, to outside countries, is perhaps a practical matter for people who committed crimes within South Africa, who may want to travel.  That is their concern, Mr Chairman.  It is no reason, it is no reason for not asking a witness to say what he has done as the Head of that conspiracy, Mr Chairman, and we persist in asking questions, Mr Chairman.  The Act says, what happened within and without the Republic of South Africa.  The terms of reference of the Harms Commission were different, they said only what happened within South Africa.  There is no distinction.  And I would submit, Mr Chairman, that we are entitled to ask the questions.  The witness can refuse to answer if he so desires, but we are doing it, having given full notice that unless he answers these questions he will not have satisfied the provisions of the Act, Mr Chairman.
	Do you understand the position ...