CHAIRPERSON
Mr Hattingh, if you could just assist, if one takes a look at Section 20(3) says
"... whether a particular act, omission or offence contemplated in subsection (2) is an act associated with a political objective, shall be decided with reference to the following criteria ...",
	then they set down proportionality, motive, context, etc, but does not include any act, omission or offence committed by any person referred to in subsection (2) who acted (i) for personal gain, and then they've got the exclusion relating to  informers.  Now, just for purposes of argument, let's say that somebody performs an act, his objective being purely political, there has been no agreement about payment, etc, he goes and he performs the act and then after the act, he gets rewarded to his surprise.  Would that be for personal gain?  When he performed the act, there was no motive for personal gain, because he didn't know that he would get rewarded, but then after conducting the act, the fact is, and I am not saying we are finding it here, but just for purposes of argument, the fact is that he does get rewarded, then can it not be said that he acted for personal gain, even though at the time of performing the act, he didn't have that motive or intention, but in fact, he became a rich man because he did the act and only for that reason?