“A court of law is bound by rules of evidence and the pleadings, but a Commission is not. It may inform itself of facts in any way it pleases - by hearsay evidence and from newspaper reports or even through submissions or representations on submissions without sworn evidence.‟ 3 The Commissions of Inquiry Act [Chapter 10:07 ] governs the conduct of this inquiry. Section 7of the Act provides as follows: “It shall be the duty of the commissioners after taking the oath referred to in section five— (a) to make a full, faithful and impartial inquiry into the matters specified in the proclamation; and (b) to conduct the inquiry in accordance with the directions, if any, in the proclamation; and (c) in due course, to report to the President in writing the result of their inquiry; and (d) when required to do so, to furnish to the President a full statement of the proceedings of the commission and of the reasons leading to the conclusions arrived at or reported”. In order to discharge its duty of impartially establishing facts sufficient to reach conclusions about what happened as per the Terms of Reference, the Commission adopted an inquisitorial approach. The inquisitorial role of commissions of inquiry has been highlighted as follows: “A Commission is itself responsible for the collection of evidence, for taking statements from witnesses and for testing the accuracy of 3 S v Sparks and Others 1980(3) SA 952 (T) 10 10