In our response to the indictment we had stated that it reflects a completely political/ideological approach and in that sense most resembles the statement of an opposition party indicating that this is a political case. Our opinion that this case is a political one has only been strengthened after reviewing the chief public prosecutor's observations on the merits of the case. The observations on the case by the claimant use a language that is essentially political/ideological. In disregarding the observations and comments in our preliminary response the claimant party has unfortunately maintained its prejudiced and ideological approach in its statements. As in the indictment the observations on merits of the case are replete with terminology reflecting a particular political/ideological stance. However "imperialism" "treason" "religious reactionary" "reactionaries" "religion traders" "conspirator" "colonialist" "mandate supporter" "collaborator" "reactionary" "local and international command source" and "political hegemony project" are all terms which have no definition in law.