MR ZILWA
I would submit Mr Chairman that there is absolutely no indication whatsoever that would give rise to such an inference.  In fact on the contrary, to fortify their stated belief that they believed they were acting in the furtherance of the objectives of their organisation, uncontradicted evidence which has been given is that after they had committed the offence, they proceeded to the higher echelons of their organisation, they had reported to Ntekiso who in turn reported to Madikizela and so on and so forth, that is within the organisation.  After committing the act, since as I say, they subjectively believed it would be in furtherance of the objectives of the organisation.  They went to their organisation and said "We did this and this is our motivation".  That would in my submission fortify what they say, that they genuinely and bona fide believed that they were furthering the interests of their organisation.  Hence they approached their organisation after committing the acts and actually telling them everything because they claimed or they believed to be doing that under the banner of the organisation.
	So what I'm saying is, contrary to any affirment that there was no bona fide belief on their part that they were furthering the interest of their organisation, all indications by them subsequent to the commission of the defence are such that they genuinely believed that they were furthering the interest of the organisation, hence they reported the act to them.  So I would submit that that should over and above everything else that they have stated, go to fortify their stated belief that they were furthering the interests of their organisation and I would further add that there's not an iota of evidence to even suggest that at the time they committed the offence they knew because the relevant time is the actual time of the commission of the offence.  They knew that they were acting against the interest of their organisation and to take that even a bit further there is uncontroverted evidence on their part, that they had intended to carry on similar operations but to show that at all material times they wanted to remain within the bounds of the policies of their organisation, when it was pertinently brought to their attention that in fact, contrary to their belief the feeling of their organisation i.e. the ANC was such that even though this dastardly act had occurred but people should really not take it personally upon themselves to retaliate or to do anything else.  When they received the message that the President of the organisation, President Mandela, was in fact appealing for calm and for people not to take the law into their hands with regard to this particular incident, they obeyed that ...[intervention]
ADS. DE JAGER:   Mr Zilwa, it's not required by the Act that they should act in the interest of the ANC.  Section 22(a) says bona fide in the furtherance of a political struggle.