any link could be perceived between such recommendations and the parties before the court or those directly interested in the outcome of the appeals. Alleged internal HDC email dated August 5th 2015 46. He or she might be less ready to dismiss the alleged internal email dated August 5th 2015 between HDC staff, although HDC was unable to confirm it. He/she would however note that even if authentic: i. it is the only alleged documented material in relation to possible follow up of the recommendations, ii. it is dated before the election, iii. that four of the persons named therein allegedly had interviews scheduled for 4th December 2015 after the election, while five were already awaiting allocation before the election. The recommendations were being acted upon by the HDC. The contention that there could have been a perception of a snub or disrespect in their handling would, therefore, not stand up to the scrutiny of a fair-minded and informed observer. 47. Further, the documentary material now available to the informed observer reveals:a. Recommendations which expressly recognise the absence of any role for the Judiciary in the allocation process. b. Allocation of housing to recommendees in 2013 under the previous government. c. A reported statement by the Minister of Housing under the previous government confirmed by his letter dated January 10th 201819, that the 19 Record of Appeal page 748 24