Actually, your Honours, my reply is that I don't need to place it before the witness, but I would move it now into evidence as a relevant document under 89(C). The document is relevant because on the face of it it's quite clear that it is mining records, exactly as counsel points, out for a period of time after this witness was mining commander, not during the time he was the mining commander. The locations mentioned are locations that this witness directly tied to this witness's testimony. Some of the names mentioned of the commanders are persons who this witness has mentioned as people he knew that were involved in mining.
So the witness's testimony goes to help corroborate the authenticity of this document. It goes to help the Trial Chamber understand what it is, because, as you can see, it's very similar - as far as what is recorded is similar to the other book, the Black Guard report book, that was put in, and for that reason it is obviously relevant because the diamond mining is I think - I don't think anyone is asking me to explain why diamond mining is relevant to the case and this further provides evidence that the mining was going on in an organised fashion by the RUF in the manner that the witness has described.