MR MBANDAZAYO
Okay, Chairperson.  Chairperson and the victims, that PAC believes that - in fact how he puts it, the founding President of the PAC, to say that it's a plain dishonesty to say you hate the sjambok, not the person who is wielding it.  So their policy was based on that.  So saying, look you can fight and say you are fighting apartheid, the laws, but as long as the people who are passing those laws, you are not shaking them, you will never - they will just change the laws.  The best thing is to hit the person and that's how they ... And they went further to say even if you can say, argument, and say look, the person who were passing the laws were members of parliament, why don't you attack them?
	But you say look, the argument is that who was saying in the post office, you are in the wrong queue, were the members of parliament.  Or were they the citizens or the innocent civilians?  They were the innocent civilians who will tell you that you are in the wrong queue.  It was not the member of parliament.  So in a way they were implementing the policies of the government.  So that's - their whole policy surrounds that and hence you find that most of the time they will always talk about the whites, saying because the whites were in power and it so happened, the people who were in power were white and they will say even if it was the black people, irrespective of what.  That's why they would say that is the reason some time in the early '60s they were also attacking chiefs, because they were collaborating.  That is why they were killing black policemen, because they were part of the system.  So in a way that's how they were explaining that.  Though it may seem racist because of the colour of the skin of the people who were in the ruling class, but it was not specifically the targeted class, but they were targeted because they were the ruling class.
	Now those are known by the Committee, it has many a times - unfortunately this time I could not call somebody in the higher hierarchy of APLA, because of the death of one of the members of the High Command during this week, they are busy preparing for that.  I normally call somebody in the High Command to explain, for even the victims to understand, to explain how they were coming up with all those policies and the attacks.  Because at the end of the day, the applicants were just carrying out orders and they have to.  They were not the policy makers, the were people who were making those policies and who were identifying targets, though at times they were asked to select targets.
	Now Chairperson, having said that, we know that some of them, we talk about the hard and soft targets, I know Mr Lax you had the privilege of meeting the delegation of APLA during the Human Rights Violations, and some of them, especially Mr Fihla, who is a General now, he was almost one of the influential people in APLA and articulate and eloquent people and in most of the hearings I've been using him to explain some of these things, and he had explained some of these things of hard and soft targets, which is the reason in some instances we'd say look, we did not make any differentiation between hard and soft targets.  As far as they are concerned it's that white people, even at school who were trained how to handle a firearm, and it's not necessary to say because he's not in the Army, necessarily means that he's not military aware, he has been trained for that.  So there was a strong debate about those things.  But in any event, that was their policy.
	Now Chairperson, having said that, it's my submission without wasting your time, that the applicant has met all the requirements of the Act, and he has made full disclosure before this Committee, of his involvement in this incident.  Chairperson, it's clear that even the police did not have evidence against him, except what was allegedly written by Valtengua Nkanyezi, and they could not pin anything on him.  Hence, when he denied it there is nothing they can do about it, but he decided, despite that, to come forward and tell the Committee of what actually happened. 
	Chairperson, also the question of Valtengua, where he comes up and saying he was involved, Chairperson it's my submission that the version of the applicant must be accepted, because at the time when he was making his application, Valtengua was already dead, there was no reason for him to hide somebody who is dead, not to say he was involved in this operation, because he was not in any event going to answer for that.  So in a way, Chairperson, I'm trying to say that there might be something with this report which is here, though I don't have facts, but I don't see any reason because at the time the applicant was making an application, Valtengua was already dead, there was no reason for him not to say: "I was involved with Valtengua, who is now deceased".  And as I indicated, I tried to trace this Dawn Faku who is in Bloemfontein and I asked him about why he did not apply and he said: "I was not involved, I don't know and I was shocked when I was told that I was involved in this incident, I had nothing to do with it.  I would have curtly have applied if I was involved in this incident."
	So Chairperson, it's therefore my submission that at the time the applicant, inasmuch as everybody was involved in negotiations, as we all know, PAC was still involved in the armed struggle and it had not yet suspended the armed struggle.  As we know that some of these incidents continued up until 1994.  It's therefore my submission that the applicant has made full disclosure and also that when he acted he did not act for personal gain.  He did not know any of the victims which were in the bus and as he put it, there may have been members of PAC in the bus or ANC in the bus and they would have died as a result of his actions.  So Chairperson, it's therefore my submission that the applicant, in terms of the Act, has discharged the onus which is put on him on a balance of probabilities that he indeed acted on behalf of a known political organisation in the furthering of its aims and objectives, and that he made full and proper disclosure of his involvement in the incident.  And therefore, Chairperson, it's my submission that he should be granted amnesty as applied for.
	Unless the Committee would want me to address it on any specific point, Chairperson.