MR DU PLESSIS
: Mr Chairman may I perhaps have an opportunityfrom the applicant's point of view just to comment on the applications?  Mr Chairman in respect of the court order, I've read in thenewspapers about the court order, I don't exactly know in whatway the court order binds this Committee.   What I would wantto say in respect of the 14 day period, I'm informed by my learnedfriend Mr Curran that that was applicable, or that is applicableto witnesses apparently who have to appear in front of the HumanRights Violation's Committee.   Mr Chairman if I read Section30 correctly, and especially Section 30(2), it makes provisionspecifically for this Committee to request a person to give evidenceat the hearing of the Commission.   If one reads Section 30(2)carefully, it says
  "If during any investigations by or any hearing beforethe Commission, that means during any hearing before the Commission,any person is implicated in a manner which may be to his or herdetriment the Commission shall, if such person is available, affordhim or her an opportunity to submit representations..."
and then in the last sentence:
  "...or to give evidence at a hearing of the Commission."
Now that clearly must be the same hearing referred to in the firstsentence of sub-section (2).   I read this Section as meaningthat the procedure that the Committee has followed under thesecircumstances, is the correct procedure.   There is not time periodand obviously one then has to apply the
2b normal /...
MR DU PLESSIS 276 ADDRESS
normal rules of natural justice, which means that a reasonabletime period afforded to a person would be proper.  The indicationis that both these witnesses have had knowledge of the fact thatthey are required to appear on Thursday and it is our view thatunder the circumstances, where we are not dealing with a criminaltrial or a civil trial and where we're simply dealing with somebodywho has to come and tell the truth, and where we are also dealingwith a situation that these witnesses will only be required togive evidence at these hearings in respect of the applicationof Col Venter, so their evidence will be very limited.   It willbe relevant pertaining to Col Venter's application.   
 On that basis we fail to see where any prejudice lies in respectof these witnesses, perhaps the only prejudice might be that theyhaven't seen the specific application and the written part thereof.
MR MPSHE(?):: I'm not even sure they need to see the applicationbeforehand.