MR MALAN
My question really comes down to this, the evidence of the applicants, more than one of the applicants were saying that here the community and they themselves were outraged, emotions went high, it's very difficult to control and calm people under such situations, but at the same time then they argue, and I mean from the first statement is deduced the revenge approach and what they did subsequent to that, but secondly they were also saying that they showed a lot of restraint, self-discipline, they rounded them up, they didn't kill them, and this was part of the protection of the community which eventually led to their execution.   Now my question is, even if one were to read the revenge element into it, could that not be set aside and one still argue that it was indeed also in the execution of their duty to protect the community?   I'm just asking you to argue the principle of that approach.