MR CLAASSEN
Mr Chairman and if I may refer the Committee to page 47 of the bundle, the 8th of September 1997 he was, a decision was made based on this particular application, in which amnesty was denied on the basis that guilt in the application was denied by the applicant.
	Mr Chair if I might then refer to the exhibit handed out, and specifically the letter from the law firm of van der Westhuizen and Associates, dated the 17th of September 1997, which specifically refers to this decision made by, or taken by the Amnesty Committee.  Mr Chair I don't know if you would just like me to read it out?  Alright.  There's just certain, there's just specific, I'm sure the Committee will follow from the, what's said in here it's basically brought to the Committee's attention that the first application appears to be not the true facts and the applicant would like to submit a further application.  
Specifically referring to point 5, it appears that it was arranged that due to the facts set out there, that further particulars or further submission would be made to the Amnesty Committee, which would then be done, and specifically point 7, paragraph 7 in this letter, which it says that the Amnesty Committee is requested to hold the matters over until the, it could be classified as hearable.  If I may refer to EXHIBIT A2, which is then a return from Advocate van der Merwe, sorry, it appears from the amnesty application I see it's signed by Ms Hoskins, or Martin Coetzee, and which, it refers to the previous letter sent to them, and also just giving the reason why it was decided not to grant the applicant amnesty, and the first page of the applicant's first application.  Mr Chair I'd specifically like to refer to the last paragraph, and if I may, where it is requested
"...please submit the new application before 30th September 1997.  Hopefully it will clarify matters."
And the new fax number is given.  Mr Chair if I may continue, based on this, if I go to A4 of the bundle, and it is said here that apparently Ms van der Westhuizen's firm has been informed that the matter was classified as hearable, and just that they have not received any further correspondence and would like the matter to be taken further.  
Mr Chair, A5 of the bundle I think that is basically on which this whole, my whole argument, ...(intervention)