CHAIRPERSON
Yes, I think this just gets down to one very simple point.  From the line of your cross-examination, one would imagine that trying to establish that what they said here about them being tortured in a particular way, their private parts being electrocuted, etcetera, was recent fabrication.
	Now, they said 'No, because we had given it in a written statement even prior to the Human Rights Violation Hearings.'  And that's the only issue, really.  We as a Committee, and I agree with you, I don't think the whole statement can be admitted as evidence as to what happened when they were arrested, where they were taken, who they saw, etcetera.  It's just that one point.
	And then is it not possible just to get at some agreement whether there's recent fabrication or not.  It's not a question of having to study those whole statements and go through them with your clients so that all other issues - because it's just that one point which was raised by the applicants.