MR PRINSLOO IN FURTHER ARGUMENT
Mr Chairperson, just one aspect with regard to the failed action.  The case of Froneman and Harmse is of application here in that an innocent police officer was shot.  You asked for an example, and I have highlighted that aspect.
	The other aspect with respect, is that the first applicant was the person who determined the target and gave the order, and what he believed was that those weapons had to be obtained at that stage, at that evening.
	What Holder believed and what was conveyed and what he says now, does not have any clear evidence, but what has been determined is that Swart supports the first applicant as well as the facts emanating therefrom.  It is my submission with respect that this is about what their objective was and that their objective had been carried out.
	This is of application for all three applicants, and not only the one.  The differences in their evidence regarding what happened that evening or not, and the fact that this took place on the 23rd of April, further substantiates the political objective behind obtaining weapons in time for the election.
	Thank you Chairperson.