ADV PRIOR
To the extent that the statement was not under oath, obviously the evidential weight in these proceedings is minimal.  There is precedent for the procedure or for the fact that unsworn statements have been read out throughout the history of the Amnesty Committee, such practice has been followed and allowed in many amnesty applications to the extent that the applicant feels that he is now prejudiced by that, unfortunately the process doesn't cater for that save that if there is a feeling that the public only have heard one side of the story obviously I think that could be addressed via the media or through the media.  Unfortunately as Mr Dehal has pointed out there is very little that this Committee can in fact do to assist the applicant in respect of the objection that he makes.  The statement is now on record, it's been attended at an open hearing, I don't have any practical solution other than if the applicant feels aggrieved by that he could also maybe talk to it and get equal time to talk to it via the representatives of the broadcasting media.  Thank you Mr Chairperson.