MR BOOYENS
Mr Chairman, the position of Mr van Zyl in this regard, I will address the Committee on the basis that as far as we can see in Mr van Zyl's position, it makes no difference to his position whether Scorpion was Madondo or was not Madondo.  It makes no difference to Mr van Zyl's position, so I will accept for purposes of argument that the identity of Scorpion has been established.  Mr van Zyl is in any case not in a position to say to you that he can state as a fact it was or it wasn't the man.
	Now when my learned friend, not the one who is present today, the one who appeared yesterday, was asked on what basis they opposed the application of Mr van Zyl, I must confess I had a bit of difficulty in understanding what the exact nature of - sorry as one gets older these things give you problems - I understood the basis of the objection to have been something like that he wasn't killed in action, I think that's what she said.  Now I don't understand what really the nature of the position was and in fact when the relative today gave testimony, she in fact, although obviously the Committee is not bound by what she said, but she in fact said that she is glad that they came out with the truth.  
	I would submit that as far as Mr van Zyl is concerned in any case, that his evidence was not shown to be unreliable or untruthful, there was no evidence really to gainsay his evidence.  There are certain contradictions between the various applicants.  Mr Chairman, if the Committee members and I were to tell a story about something that happened two months ago, never mind 20 years ago, I would be mildly surprised if there are not certain contradictions.