MR JANSEN
Sorry Mr Chairman, the statutory duties of a Policeman are also couched in very wide words, it is to investigate time, to police and secure public order, I haven't got that wording of Sections 2 or 5 or whatever in the Police, but the point is the way that our law has dealt with that, coming from in civil liability, from the case of Ewels v Minister of Police, it has placed especially on Policemen that duty to act positively.  That reasoning in Ewels, was referred to in this case of Gaba, that is found at, unfortunately the page numbers have been cut off, but it is the second last page there on the right.  It is at (b) and (c), there is a reference to Minister of Police v Ewels.  What it just says there is that to determine whether there is a legal duty, we look at the morays in society.  The illogicality of the matter is probably more apparent than real, one would obviously say well, you know, for somebody at Vlakplaas at that stage, the notion of reporting the crimes of his colleagues, especially those crimes where he has full knowledge of all the detail, not just the vague notion that they will be involved in covert operations, but of a specific crime of which all the relevant facts are known, the idea of reporting that, would not even occur to somebody.  In fact, somebody living in that culture for so long, would you know, the idea simply would not arise.
	But the fact of the matter is Mr Chairman, that the law will not judge somebody in that position, in that way.  The law will most certainly require of a Policeman who becomes aware of such serious offences, offences relating to the toppling of what one may in crude terms call, gun-running and toppling of a neighbouring country, there is no doubt in my mind that the law would place a duty on somebody to, on a Policeman, to report that offence and to do what reasonably can be done, to stop it.  I think if one reads the case of Gaba, it seems to be a lot less serious type of situation where that omission is found to constitute a criminal offence.
	For that reason Mr Chairman, I believe that Mr Ras is clearly an accessory because he heard at the time of the coup, of just after it had occurred, or at least at a time when it certainly could no be stopped any more, he heard of it.  He obviously knew of the smuggled weapons, in fact he had seen that previously, not the smuggled weapons, the weapons that were handed over, and then he subsequently realised what they were for.  He obviously, listening to the radio and the progress of the coup, must have become aware of the fact that people were dead or were killed, and therefore he comes an accessory in that respect.