Hon speaker, the reference group, I think, was very important for the very reason that it was important for political parties at least to confirm whether they knew the applicant. Otherwise anyone could have made a claim and yet it could have been just an ordinary criminal case.
I have dealt with some of the cases and I have paid specific attention to that issue. I must say that in a number of cases I have dealt with, I have found very vague evidence; at times no evidence at all. At times it looked like somebody was just claiming.
In some cases, there has been very strong evidence. This has been available, so I don't think at the moment there is even a problem in finding out, because the applicant will actually explain that he belongs to a particular organisation and, therefore, it is easy to check with that organisation, regardless of a decision taken by somebody that you should not do it. It is more logical to do it; otherwise how do you determine the facts?
This is what I have been doing in my method of dealing with this matter, and I have taken a number of decisions on the basis of this very issue. So, at the moment I don't think there is any difficulty in handling that one. I have found quite a lot of them; it is very difficult to prove that this was a political somebody. In fact, in some cases, even the parties were not able to say, "Yes, this was a card-carrying member of our organisation". So, at the moment that has not become a difficulty and I am sure even that decision that was taken - I think - was not a decision taken by a court. As you have said, it was a decision taken by a bureaucrat in terms of just working. I don't think it's something that binds me from taking a decision. So, be happy with that. Thank you.