MS THABETHE
In summing up I would like to summarise whether I think in my submissions the applicant does require with the requirements of the Act with the question of full disclosure.  My opinion is that the version given at the trial court is very different from the version that we are told today, but the applicant explained that he had no obligation to tell the truth at the trial.  Still though, with the evidence which that he has given us today, there are a lot of inconsistencies.  And the applicant hasn't come out clearly to explain factors and questions put to him.
	And just on the question of the children coming out and talking to the applicant.  I don't think it  is very likely that children who are in the house, a house that has just been shot at, can be so courageous to come out and actually speak to the person who has been doing the shooting.  But I don't know, it is just my opinion.  As I said before, the applicant does not seem to be a good speaker, if I may put it so.  It is like he is unable to explain himself and the sequence of events clearly.  So it is very difficult for me to make an opinion whether a full disclosure was made or not.  It is not convincing that it was, but I may be wrong.
	Then on the question of political objectivity.  We may not doubt the fact that the incident occurred during a time of ANC/IFP unrest in KwaZulu/Natal.  At the same time there
3A - 13.2	is/...
MS THABETHE	232	ADDRESS
is nothing which shows the connection or a causal link between the offence committed, that is the shooting of the two females and children, and the political objectivity sought to be achieved.  There is no connection between the two.
	At the same time the applicant indicated that their purpose was to kill three IFP people who had attacked the Luthuli kraal.  However, I don't think that would justify the killing of the Nqobo family and children.  I am not clear as to what the political objective was.
	Thank you, Chairperson.