MR HATTINGH
Mr Chairman, I can merely make a submission because I do not find myself moving within a normal court of law where we have normal rules, but what appeared to be the most obvious status of such a document is once it is annexed to a signed application for amnesty, it's being sent in timeously, it's signed, the application, it's annexed and it's stated, "I annex hereto my full - there were not enough space on page three (3).  I want to say more.  So look at the following page that I'm adding", or, "I refer to the statement enclosed herewith".
	Then I say whether it's signed or not is not important.  At some stage that application is signed.  There's no indication that the statement or the application is to be signed on each page.  Then I say that document, the additional statement, the status thereof is that it does form part and is the version of the applicant.  Once we deal with further statements which came to light at whatever later stage, being sent in for whatever reason and it is not signed then, then I say it has no status, it has no legal existence apart from the fact that the applicant will have to explain how this came into being.  
	Why his attorney or his legal representative prepared such a thing, where they got the knowledge from and why they submitted it to the Committee.  But it cannot be said that that document not having been signed which came to light later, which was furnished to the Committee at a later stage, is on the same footing, on the same status value as the document which was submitted together with the application and in this particular matter with this applicant Mr Gushu, we're dealing with the first statement which, on the information supplied to this Committee now, was part and parcel of that very first application.  
	And the second statement, the status of, is dubious, but the first one I would like to submit is there's no doubt about the status of that document.