MR DEHAL
Mr Chairperson, as difficult as it may sound, was that is not his version.  It is a version that is in a way plausibly tainted with the version of Alzina and the brother Frederick who says listen, there's an ANC/IFP conflict going on.  I'm not saying that the deceased was IFP and whilst Alzina today said "I'm not saying the applicant is ANC" her statement says yes, they were ANC members.  At that level it must be seen clearly that there were ANC and IFP conflict.
	Now if one takes that a little further, ask the question, is there really opposition before us here today to the applicant's amnesty application?  If you look at Alzina's application she agrees when Mr Mapoma asked the question, that yes, the applicant and his members were ANC members, that is in my statement and I said so, they lived in an ANC area and indeed that was so.  My boyfriend the deceased was in an IFP area, he comes from an IFP area and that's principally the reason for the fight.  Frederick goes further, he says I agree with my wife, it's an ANC/IFP conflict, it's politically motivated.  Now political leanage is established even on the witnesses for the victims.  Full disclosure is the problem and there I have no argument.   Sorry, if you'd bear with me?
	The only one reservation that I have with Alzina's version is that appears to distance herself today until Mr Mapoma raises a statement with the ANC leanage and the IFP leanage.  It seems if at all - I'm sorry, I'm not sure that I can submit this but it seems to me personally that knowing that this is an amnesty application there is a need for political leanage that she distances herself from it.  I do not know what happened at the trial but I'm told by the applicant that she punctuated her entire evidence on the basis that he, the applicant, then an accused, was an ANC man, that the deceased was an IFP man, that this was ongoing conflict between the ANC and the IFP.  That is the only reservation that I have and Mr Chairperson, with those submissions I submit that if one reads within section 20(i) of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34 of 1995, at the level of there being an act or omission or offence without reading too much into the need to establish whether there is an offence here, perhaps looking at whether it's an act in itself, the applicant has made out a case for amnesty, he does have difficulties with Alzina's version looked at against him but there has been many matters of this sort with difficulties for the TRC.  That in itself, like a trial, does not dismiss his application as negatory.  Thank you.