MR SAMUELS
No, it's not mentioned specifically.  On page 113, 112, in answer to the question: Furnish sufficient particulars of any acts, he says
"General defence of the community against the IFP."
My submission is that at the time when these applications were filled in, not all the applicants were ad idem on what it is that they were going to specifically write in each application.  There had been - and it may be viewed incorrectly that a policy decision was taken on how to fill in these forms and on that reason my submission is, there will logically be a difference between what the applicant will be saying now in oral testimony as opposed to that paragraph A(1).  
	I appreciate that can be argued on a matter of inconsistency and therefore can be rejected as evidence.  My argument would be that a general phrase was written and it is only now that the specifics are available, that we have tried to hand them up.  I understand your question.