ADV SANDI
Mr Arendse, is this not exactly the situation Section 32 was designed to deal with?  And can I hear from you what you've got to say about the AD decision on this very point?  There was a decision by the AD some time, I think early this year.  I do not have the exact reference of this case, I think it was du Preez and du Plessis, versus Mthimkulu where the AD had an occasion to express it's views on the interpretation of this section here.
	Are you not dealing with a Section 32 situation here, where a person's name has been mentioned and that person has been given an opportunity to refute what has ...[inaudible] about him, it doesn't have to be said by the applicant.