GEORGE BIZOS
We are not unmindful of that letter Judge Wilson.  We have taken the matter up with her.  What we are asking you to do is that this is a very difficult part of Mrs Hani's life, she is torn with conflict and inner conflict and it may be that the letter is unfortunate but I would submit it should not weigh too heavily on the Committee as to whether or not a postponement should be granted.  If we were dealing only with her personal reasons it may well have been a different matter, but we submit that there are cogent reasons.  In fact you will see, Judge Wilson, that on top of page 2 Mrs Nicholls says that it was agreed, more than three months ago that this would be the date.
	But if we go on with the further reasons Mr Chairperson.  We in fact, and I don't want to read the affidavit out, we in fact only got a substantial portion of the documentation two weeks ago, and we had to go to the Johannesburg International Airport in order to get it.  Whoever's fault it may have been that is a common cause fact.  
	Also we note that these voluminous documents from Ada Parker and Mrs Lewis in Die Patriot were obviously burdensome to members of the Committee and the Committee asked by letter would they please indicate which portions of these documents are they relying on.  Apparently the Commission was favoured by highlighting a number of these documents.  We were not favoured by this.  
	Indeed in truth and in fact we have some 230 pages of -in the amnesty application, which we only got two weeks ago and which we could try and sift out during the long weekend, from the 14th to the 16th, those new documents.  
	Those new documents introduce a new ground, the one that I indicated as number four, that is that Mr Hani was a military target and this is why he was shot.  That inquiry will require viva voce evidence and documentation in order to show that there was no war on at that stage, he was not a military target.  We will have to produce documentation and evidence that he in fact had relinquished his role when he took over the position of general secretary of the South African Communist Party.
	There is some argument about the number of pages that were actually served.  Matters are not decided by the number of pages, with respect, or the weight of paper, but rather by the contents.  If this case were to be decided on the basis of the applicants, that we only have to look at Ada Parker's letters and Die Patriot, then of course not much research would have been necessary.  But, as a result of their putting up a case that they acted on behalf of the Conservative Party, to collect some of the documents is not very difficult, but to interview persons who made public statements dissociating themselves from the applicants' acts, in the highest positions of the Conservative Party, is a matter which requires preparation and consideration.
	Furthermore, we submit that this is a matter, and I did make an offer to counsel for the applicants before we came here, I think it was Wednesday of last week, we should actually have a meeting, such as a pre-trial meeting, this not being a trial we could call it a pre-hearing meeting, in which irrelevant documents are removed from the files and let me say, that it isn't only the Ada Parker and Die Patriot, the applicants have sought to burden the Committee with literature relating to perceptions of Marxism and character assassination of the late Mr Hani, which we submit that on a proper appreciation of the main issues in this case do not have to burden the record that you have to consider.  We ourselves, mindful of what our submission is, will try and avoid personal references to the background ...(tape ends)  ....I have given notice of what the main issues are likely to be from our perspective of the case.
	Having regard to what I have indicated we have already taken up the better, if not the whole part of today, to do this case on a piecemeal basis is going to be wasteful and we will not be able to do justice to the case.  Cases are best decided where there is a continuity in the proceedings, where we muster all the information that we have to put to the applicants right at the outset rather than later when it becomes available so that there are no adjournments and not recalling of witnesses.  
	Therefore I would submit that the proper course to adopt for the Committee at this stage is to grant a postponement to a date suitable to the Committee and because we, as counsel, have already been involved in the matter and the parties no doubt have spent some expense in order to retainers and preparatory work has been done, we ask that both sides should be considered as to when they are available and that the matter should be postponed, preferably to a period of more than five days.  It may be that there are other applications which can possibly be postponed to subsequent days on an ad hoc basis, not those of long duration, which may not make it necessary for the Committee to waste the days that may not be taken up.  But we submit that from our view of the case that at least 10 hearing days will be necessary for the proper adjudication of this case.
	Thank you Mr Chairperson, Members of the Committee.