iii. that such recommendations to the HDC did not involve communication with the then Minister of Housing. iii. that recommendations in relation to HDC housing were also made in June 2015, also during the tenure of the previous government, in respect of persons considered to be needy and deserving. iv. that the material now available, even if all the allegations are accepted for the purpose of this analysis, does not demonstrate follow ups, or lobbying of Government officials, post September 7th 2015. v. that as at August 2015, (the date of the alleged HDC internal email), (before the election), applications of the 2015 recommendees were already being processed, with some awaiting allocation of housing and others having interviews scheduled in December 2015. Any allegation of perception of a snub or disrespect could not therefore survive scrutiny. vi. that there is therefore no reason, apart from the purported WhatsApp messages, to consider that the 2015 recommendations would have had a greater chance of success under the present government than under the previous government. vii. that the allegation concerning WhatsApp communications with the PM, a party interested in the outcome of the election petitions, when subjected to even minimal scrutiny, is too tenuous to excite concern by the fair-minded and informed observer. Alleged Communications with HDC – nexus/whether logical connection 69. As a matter of common sense, logic, and law, there needs to be a logical connection between the matters which it is being alleged may give rise to lack of impartiality or the perception thereof, and the decision that it is contended may be affected. See for example John Henry Smith, Barbara Gomes, Ishwar Galbaransingh, Amrith Maharaj, Northern Construction Limited v His Worship the Late Chief Magistrate Sherman McNicholls, The Director of 38