MR STRYDOM
Thank you, Chairperson.  In my heads of argument, I started by setting out the facts.  After listening to my learned friend's argument, there's no real dispute as far as these facts are concerned so I'm not going to repeat them.  I would like to start my argument on page 8 of my heads of argument, but before I deal with that, my learned friend made the submission that the applications that were filed during February 1998 were fresh applications.  Now I cannot agree with submission.  The fact of the matter, applications were made before the original cut off date being the 10th May 1997 and Amnesty numbers were given to these applications so he is not correct.  The fact that they were not complete does not mean they weren't applications.  They were applications and therefore what followed thereafter was actually further particulars, more detailed applications and although the standard form or the Form 1 was used when further details were given, that does not mean that what was provided was a fresh application.  The point I'm making is that there were applications before the TRC at that stage already.
	Mr Chairman, in my heads of argument, I firstly argue on the basis of Section 18 standing on it's own and what I'm saying is that if one looks at Section 18, there is a reference to "shall".  Now immediately there's a reference in an Act to the word "shall" the initial idea is that that is a preemptory reference.  My submission is that, not in all cases, where the word "shall' is being used can it be argued that it's preemptory, my submission is that in fact in this instance, that word "shall" refers more to the time period and the cut off date and I would submit that the cut off date and the time period is definitely preemptory to the extent that even substantial compliance would not be sufficient.  So an application should be launched before the cut off date but on interpretation I would submit that the second portion, although the word "shall" may have reference to submit such an application to the Commission in the prescribed form, that that is merely a directory and not preemptory and ....[intervention]