Special Report Transcript Episode 11, Section 6, Time 34:49

I regard my Committee to be performing a quasi-judicial function where we weigh the evidence that has been adduced before us. We know that we are not approaching this as we would approach a trial, we don’t have the advocarial system in operation here. So, we take part in the investigation, we call for information that we think might assist us or might assist an applicant and we weigh this. Now, we don’t take in to account for example when a man says I’m sorry for what I did. You know, a man may come and say I’m sorry for what I did, and then maybe very little else he might be able to say to justify his offence. Well, that admission that he is sorry and he is apologetic may well be the kind of thing that he’d do if he appeared before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but before the Amnesty Committee we’d like to know what his acts were, what were the political objectives, how were his acts related to a political objective. And if we think this is the kind that meets the requirements of the act, then we treat it and we give a decision in the matter.

Notes: Judge Mall (Amnesty Committee chair)

References: there are no references for this transcript