RAYMOND JULIUS RADIE
Thank you Advocate.  I do not want to take up unnecessary time of the Committee but I feel that the following remarks perhaps might assist the Committee to obtain a completely full picture in order to make a decision in this matter.
	Mr Chairman, the King William's Town Golf Club is one of the oldest clubs in the country.  It was founded in 1892 and in 1992 we had a series of centenary celebrations.  I had been a member of the club since 1963 and also served for many years as a Committee member of the club and was very deeply bound up in the history of the club and totally committed to it.  	And it was for this reason that I decided in my capacity as a golf club member, to organise a tournament called the Masters, the King Masters Golf Tournament as one of the culminating celebrations that year in 1992 and we were allocated a date several months in advance namely the 28th of November 1992.
	It was a non-racial tournament.  It went off extremely well and one of our own members of the club, Ivan Kwelani, if I remember correctly, won the first prize.  It was a totally non-racial event and I may just that King William's Town Golf Club was one of the very first clubs to open it's doors to all races in the 1980's.
	It therefore came as a surprise that the attack which I understand was aimed at myself and at killing and maiming as many of those present as possible, actually took place at 10p.m. in the evening because the golf tournament had finished during daylight hours and the presentation had been completed by half past seven and most of the participants in that golf club tournament had already gone home.  That was in fact fortunate.  If an attack had occurred at 6 o'clock in the evening I'm afraid that there would have been even more severe damage to both life and limb.
	The second aspect I just want to proceed to Mr Chairman, is the question of the amnesty itself, the applications of the applicants.  I have not had an opportunity personally to read the record up till now, so I haven't an exact replica of the record before me.  I'm relying on what I've read in the newspapers.
	But the Committee in essence, as I've pointed out in my affidavit and as the Committee well knows, will have to determine whether there has been a full and complete disclosure on the part of the applicants.  Have they been entirely truthful?  
	I have some doubts as to whether they have told the full story and I say that for a very good reason.  Naming me as the target at the time that they gave evidence before this Committee, frankly strikes me as strange and I honestly don't believe that I personally was the target that evening.
	I believe this attack was planned by the APLA cadres, very well planned and planned in advance but I do believe that the possible intelligence which was available to them might have been somewhat less than accurate.
	The Committee must examine the record of the criminal trial if it is possible to do so and endeavour to establish whether in fact at that time my name was mentioned as one of the targets and whether in fact the National Party was mentioned in the criminal case.  I've not had an opportunity to read that report either but I don't believe that my name was mentioned as a target during the whole of the criminal trial.
	Why then was my name mentioned?  As I've indicated to the Committee, I gave evidence by way of affidavit on the 11th of March and obviously that affidavit or a copy of it was made available to the applicant's legal counsel.  Having read that affidavit I would suggest that it provided the perfect hook upon which to hang a coat of political motivation.
	Quite frankly Mr Chairperson and Members of the Committee, the callous attack that night was an unprovoked attack on innocent civilian people who had nothing to do with the golf tournament, certainly little to do with me.  I was attending only in my capacity as one of the members of the Wine Tasters Association of King William's Town.  It was an annual dinner and there was absolutely no reason for such a callous and cold blooded attack to take place on the unfortunate people.
	For these reasons I would suggest that it is really  doubtful whether a full confession has been made.  If it has, whether in fact the applicants have been entirely truthful by raising my own name as a target in the attack.
	One aspect which does really concern me is that in our Christian world we are faced with a situation where forgiveness comes after due confession and after repentance.  In this case it is doubtful whether there has been a completely full confession but even if that is so, there is absolutely no remorse and no repentance and this is one of the things that I find the most difficult to accept in the light of our constitution, in the light of our constitutions injunction about Ubuntu and reconciliation.  
	And it must be one of the most difficult things for those friends of mine who suffered the loss of loved ones in the attack or suffered injury themselves, to accept that there is absolutely no remorse whatsoever on the part of the applicants.  Whether that in fact forms part of the criteria which the Committee has to weigh up in considering the application, is something which the Committee will have to decide and which the legislation may or may not provide for but that is a matter for the Amnesty Committee.
	I think at this stage, that is about all I wish to say Mr Chairman, Members of the Committee and I'm quite willing to answer any questions that might be put.