GEORGE BIZOS
...(inaudible) that a decision to hear the matter in chambers is not a final decision but a procedural matter.  And we submit that there is no prejudice to any of the applicants.  If anything, if the result is that they are granted amnesty, it's in their favour.  If they are refused amnesty, they are not in any different position.  But I do not believe with respect, that this Committee, having heard the evidence, having received written argument by the person who is now raising the objection, on that issue, that you should not make a decision on the evidence that has been presented here.  If you're going to do it in chambers, are you going to disregard the evidence that has forthcoming?
	I think that it would be incorrect to do so, that you can't disregard that evidence.  So there has been no decision on the amnesty yet, if the applicant feels that he's in any way disadvantaged or prejudiced, there is still time for him to undo the prejudice that he says that he has suffered.  What prejudice has he suffered by the additional evidence that has been placed before the Committee?  He's had an opportunity to cross-examine on it, his client has responded to it.