Special Report Transcript Episode 35, Section 3, Time 06:18

Why does the Committee place so much emphasis on legal representation of applicants even in cases where it holds up the proceedings for a day when applicants don’t know where their representatives are? // Well, the ground or refusal for amnesty is a matter of grave consequence to an applicant if he has already been convicted and is serving a long term of imprisonment and it is I think in our opinion very important that he should be represented so that his case can be put forward as best as it ought to be. A number of the applicants might not be particularly well educated people, might not be sufficiently sophisticated in matters of this kind, so it is important that they should. // Could you give us an idea of what is meant by full disclosure? There seem to be some confusion even with lawyers representing applicants as to what full disclosure means. // When an applicant is required to make a full disclosure he’s required to show as fully as he can whatever part he has played in the planning of the offence, in the identifying of the targets they want to attack and in the execution. So, he’s required to show precisely what he did in achieving his objectives in that regard. Sometimes he may think he has made a full disclosure. It then emerges that we have access to court records, documents in the Attorney-General’s files and those documents may reveal that certain facts have not been disclosed. It is then our duty to draw the attention of the applicant to the information contained in those documents and to afford him an opportunity to deal with them. // Is the Committee stretched in terms of resources and manpower given the flood of applications that have come in recently? // Well as you may know a large number of the applications can be dealt with and are being dealt with without the necessity of a public hearing. But wherever there has been a gross violation of human rights there has to be a public hearing. As a result of the extension of the dates we have experienced a large number of applications flowing in. They have until May to go on doing so, with the result that we think that in order to cope with all these applications it will be necessary to amend the Act by Parliament and increase the number of members on the Amnesty Committee. If they increase the number from five to at least six then it would make it possible for the Amnesty Committee to have parallel hearings by having three members constituting a committee at each hearing.

Notes: Reporter; Judge Hassan Mall (Chairman: Amnesty Committee)

References: there are no references for this transcript