Its role has not just been that of ceasefire watchdog ? but to monitor all paramilitary activity. And its role has gone beyond the labelling of incidents in terms of organisational responsibility - such as confirming the IRA's involvement in the Northern Bank robbery.

At times, the Commission has given thoughtful, intelligent, assessments - an analysis that has helped in the making of the new political arrangements .

One example of this was its explanation of the role of the Army Council ? still in place not to fight a war, but to manage the IRA's transition into peace.

The IMC will next report in April - a report that will include its assessment of the Paul Quinn killing.

Should that report be its last?

There is some thinking within the Commission that it should - but others believe its role could extend into the autumn of next year, that its assessments may be needed to help the DUP over the line on the question of devolution of policing and justice.

Its April report will be important in what it says on the Quinn murder - how it assesses IRA involvement, what level of leadership authority if any it attaches to the killing. In other words, who knew what and who gave the orders?

John Grieve was speaking for all four commissioners when he said: " Despite the fact that we are saying it is a local dispute, we do believe that those who were involved included people who are members or former members or who have associations with members or former members of the Provisional IRA."

Those comments were made last month, and they fit with the current security assessment.

One security source asked: "Those people involved, were they doing it in the strategic interests of the IRA?".

"No," the source answered.

"Were they doing it for criminal interests - local control?"

"Yes," he answered.

"Did they use their skills, or former skills of the past?"

"Yes," the source answered.

By skills he means the methods of the past - the way an attack would have been thought through and carried out.

So, the question for the police and the IMC is how they assess the current status of those involved - what are their links to the IRA? And will the republican leadership say something by way of explanation before the IMC next reports?

"It's far better people tell the truth on the thing," the source continued.

The police assessment, the IMC assessment, will play into the DUP thinking on the question of the devolution of policing and justice powers.

And this is what may take the IMC beyond that April report and into a role that extends into the autumn.

When it goes, how then do we describe any continuing activities by republicans and loyalists? Is the term paramilitary erased from our dictionary? Is everything then labelled criminal?

What about those guns that the loyalist "brigadier" Jackie McDonald talked about on Remembrance Sunday - not the UDA's guns but the " people's guns". When do they become the criminal's guns? There is thinking for the loyalists in all of this ? what they need to do to catch up before it is too late.

The IMC is now in some kind of finishing straight - and when it crosses its line, whether in April or in the autumn, then we are in a very different world.

Many of us were very sceptical when the IMC was given a role in the peace process, believing it would simply copy the homework of the police and the intelligence services. But it has made an important contribution - thinking beyond the labelling of incidents and explaining the realities and the business of conflict resolution.