Conflicting interpretations of the old apartheid and new democratic laws governing parole took centre stage at the parole application of Chris Hani's murderer, Clive Derby-Lewis, in the Pretoria High Court on Tuesday.

Legal teams for Derby-Lewis and the five respondents including the Hani family, were at odds as to which laws and their subsequent amendments were to be considered by the full bench in rendering judgment on his possible parole.

After proceedings continued past 4pm, Acting Judge President Jerry Shongwe and two additional judges ? an unprecedented panel for a parole hearing ? reserved judgment saying they realised the matter was urgent and would revert as soon as possible.

Derby-Lewis (73) had applied for parole on the basis that he was over 65 and had served 15 years of his life sentence.

His legal team argued that while he was not entitled to parole, he was eligible for it.

Under the old law according to which he was convicted, generally speaking a lifer could only qualify for parole after 20 years. This law has subsequently been tweaked with a number of amendments which has resulted in various interpretations and legal wrangling.

Arguments in favour of Derby-Lewis

His legal team argues that he is now eligible for parole after serving 15 years and qualifies for this because he is over the age of 65 and has been rehabilitated.

Arguing on behalf of the Hani family, human rights advocate George Bizos said the matter should be dismissed as it had been "cruel justice" not to allow Hani's wife Limpho to participate in Derby-Lewis's earlier parole hearings.

"Mrs Hani is a victim. The loss of her husband [due to Derby-Lewis' actions] has made her a victim. By participating, there is some comfort to the victim."

"We would have expected that one... like Derby-Lewis who owes his life to the Constitution would show a little more respect to his victims," he said.

Derby-Lewis and his accomplice Janusz Walus were sentenced to death for the murder of the SA Communist Party leader in 1993. The sentence was reduced to life imprisonment after the death penalty was abolished.

The respondents were also at pains to have the court dismiss the application on the grounds that it was the jurisdiction of the parole board and the minister of correctional services to grant parole and not the courts.

The parole board and the departments of justice and correctional services are respondents in the matter.

Bizos' argument

Cutting through the technical legal arguments of the four preceding respondents, Bizos said the court was not in a position to rule on the application.

"What do you know about this applicant... Nowhere [in these court papers] does he say I accept the Constitution, abide by it and no longer consider people like Chris Hani as the Antichrist," Bizos said raising his voice.

Bizos also said Derby-Lewis had never given his client any relief by offering an apology.

Bizos maintained that it was Hani's widow's common-law right to make representation and since this had not been done, the matter should be dismissed with costs.

This was disputed by Derby-Lewis's legal team who said Hani's counsel had not set forth enough ground to convince the court that they had a common law argument.

Speaking outside court Derby-Lewis's attorney Marius Coertze said any input by Limpho would have no "reasonable influence" on his application.

"For an input to have any reasonable influence it must a) say he is not eligible, b) say he is already not already rehabilitated and c) that his parole has not already been recommended."

A recommendation by the parole board

Coertze said the team, had a written a recommendation that Derby-Lewis's parole had been recommended by the parole board in 2007.

However the board said in court that it was premature to consider the matter in court as its internal processes were still underway.

Limpho ? who wore a smart lime green dress ? sat upright in the front row of the court with her hands clasped in her lap throughout the proceedings.

In front of her, Derby-Lewis sat flanked by his lawyers, listening attentively and jotting down notes throughout the day.

His shakes from old age were evident and his lawyer later revealed that he was weak as he did not each much more than bread and water and also suffered from prostate problems.

At the end of proceedings, donning leg irons, he was awkwardly ushered out of court by three correctional services officers.

In a statement the African National Congress Youth League re-asserted its "utter rejection" to any attempt to grant Derby-Lewis parole.

"Granting parole to assassins will set a very wrong and unsustainable precedent, and could open space for political assassinations.

Walus remains in Pretoria's C-Max prison and does not, as yet, qualify for a parole application.