ANDREA JEANNETTE LANGFORD
I will.  
	"The Heidelberg Tavern attack, amnesty applications.  
	We understand the need for unity and reconciliation in our 
new nation and that the conflicts and divisions of the past 
must at some stage be put behind us in order to achieve the 
aim of the amnesty process.
	We also understand that in order to attempt this difficult 
journey, the Amnesty Committee ought to have as complete a 
picture as possible of the causes, nature and extent of the 
gross violations of human rights, which in our case relates to 
the senseless killings of, and injuries to our sons and 
daughters.
	We have heard that full disclosure of all relevant facts relating 
to the Heidelberg attack is one of the requirements for 
amnesty.  This necessarily implies that the truth be told.  We, 
as the survivors of this gross violation of human rights, are 
deeply concerned by the nature and conduct of these 
proceedings thus far.
	Whilst not understanding the finer points of the law, it seems 
unfair to us that the Chairman is in open hearing remarked as 
follows-
	Sibaya's evidence was irrelevant to these amnesty 
applications.   The kombi must also have been drunk.  He, 
Sibaya, probably also knew the name of the name of the sheep, 
when he was attempting to answer questions about how he 
could remember certain details.
	The reaction of laughter at Sibaya's expense that these 
remarks evolved from the legal representatives of the 
applicants, Dumisa Ntsebeza, and the supporters, we feel 
detracts from the serious nature of the amnesty process and 
makes light of evidence which we believe is important in 
searching for the truth.
	Such remarks also fail to take into account our pain and our 
grief.  It is out of place to listen to these remarks in the same 
process as the evidence of the killings of our loved ones.  
	We are under the impression from the proceedings thus far, 
that the legal representatives are constrained to represent the 
minimum facts required to satisfy those requirements for 
amnesty.
	We are all of the view that the proper and full disclosure of 
the facts, has not been made.  
	We are also concerned about the manner in which Mr 
Cerqueira was cross-examined, which was in our minds, unfair 
and insensitive to his grief and loss.
	We as survivors demand the right to be treated with dignity 
and sensitivity if these proceedings are to mean anything at 
all.  
	Finally, we are present disillusioned about the process we 
have seen thus far, and must ask the question whether the 
amnesty process is simply part of the political solution 
whereby perpetrators of gross violations of human rights will 
be granted amnesty as a reward for their loyalty to their 
masters. 
	We invite the Committee to address our fears and concerns in 
this matter".
And we have all signed this.