Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-06-10

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: So any evidence from you in this regard, is either hearsay or deductions that you are making?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: Deductions, yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Then I am asking you now, why are you trying to mislead the Commission?  Why did you not tell them yesterday that this evidence is deductions which you have made, because you do not have first hand knowledge?

CHAIRPERSON: ... almost virtually (indistinct) you know some of these things were rumours, you would hear them in conversations and I think that, I don't know in relation to this part, I don't have the record ...

MR DU PLESSIS: I am referring specifically to this part, because my notes say that he said that Gen Knobel was aware of this and he went further and said that if one spends his millions, then he could not see how one could not be aware of them.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vally, what is your recollection of the evidence?

MR VALLY: That particular phrase that my learned friend is quoting, is precisely what the Doctor had said.  He made a deduction based on the fact that there was a line of authority and a line of financing of military front companies.
 Clearly it was a deduction.  Secondly I refer to point 5 for the procedures for hearings, 1.5, that hearsay evidence ...

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think that is what Mr Du Plessis is contesting.

MR VALLY: Yes, right.

CHAIRPERSON: From what I understand his question to be saying is that this witness made a statement of fact, and thereby misleading the Commission or this Panel when in fact, he should have implicated as he gave a specific answer to the specific question that he has alluded to, that it was his own deduction.
 Now, what I do not, and I confess to this, I do not know whether in fact it was the evidence that he gave yesterday, because I was saying to Mr Du Plessis my impression of his evidence, was a very cautious one.  He was always indicating that you know, some of these were rumours and some of these were things that they had over a table, but I thought that you might be helpful specifically on the point that Mr Du Plessis is ...

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, I can just point out to you that Mr Van Zyl has drawn my attention to his notes, and these were taken separately from mine, and he says that he was aware of the experimentation of what was going on.
 Not that I deduced that he was aware of that, he gave it as a fact, that is why I am saying what I am saying.

CHAIRPERSON: But I will allow the question.

MR DU PLESSIS: As it pleases the Chairman, thank you Mr Chairman.  So these were deductions that you made.  Why did you then not say to the Commission, Mr Chairman, I do not have personal knowledge of this, these are deductions that I am making?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: The reason is that I cannot believe that somebody could have been so incompetent to just move R7 million in a direction that he did not know what it was going to be used for.  Many requests were made from senior Generals at Roodeplaat, or many visits from these Generals, why did they then visit this facility which is managed by Gen Knobel without him knowing what it was about, that they do not communicate with one another.
 I believe that I am making a realistic and reasonable deduction.

MR DU PLESSIS: The question is not whether you are making a reasonable and realistic deduction, the question is why did you not tell the Commission that this was a deduction, that you did not have any personal knowledge of this?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: I believed that I made it clear that it was a deduction.  If I did not do this, then I now confirm that it was a deduction.

MR DU PLESSIS: Just to speak about your remarks about Gen Knobel, how many people worked at the RRL?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: Approximately 70.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you know every day what each person did at that laboratory, ever minute of the day?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: Of course not.

MR DU PLESSIS: Now do you expect that Gen Knobel who was not even involved, would have known?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: No, your question is irrelevant.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is not a decision for you to make.  Yesterday you testified Dr Van Rensburg, that Gen Knobel made no attempts whatsoever to assist Dr Goosen with his problem, is that correct?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: I am not aware of any problems, all I know about his attitude, Roodeplaat was a private company with which he had contracts.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yesterday you testified he didn't do anything to solve my problem or Goosen's problem, is that correct?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: Yes, it goes without saying, nothing that I could be aware of.

MR DU PLESSIS: But you did not qualify it as that, that is the problem.  You also testified it as being a fact that Gen Knobel did nothing to solve Daan Goosen's problem.

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: Did he do anything?

MR DU PLESSIS: I am asking you, please answer my question first?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: The last information I had was that he was not sympathetic with regard to this matter.

MR DU PLESSIS: Are you aware of the fact that Gen Knobel referred Dr Goosen to the Head Office of finance for his problem?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: No, I am not aware of that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Are you aware of the fact that in conjunction with Gen Knobel and HSF, that Dr Daan Goosen was referred to the State Attorney?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: Are you aware of how long Daan Goosen has been in this predicament and nothing positive has yet happened?

MR DU PLESSIS: Dr Van Rensburg, I am asking the questions and you please answer them.  Are you aware of the fact that Dr Daan Goosen in conjunction with HSF and Gen Knobel, was referred to the State Attorney for assistance?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: Are you aware of the fact that in conjunction with Gen Knobel and the State Attorney, Dr Daan Goosen was referred to the Ombudsman with regard to his problem?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you testify that as a fact?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: I did hear that he went to the Ombudsman.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you then testify it as a fact that Gen Knobel was unsympathetic and made no attempts to assist Dr Goosen with his problem?  Because then surely that is a blatant lie?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: I do not agree with you.  The information that I have at my disposal, was that Gen Knobel was unsympathetic, that he did not accept that we were part of his personnel.
 We were a private company with which he had contracts.

MR DU PLESSIS: Who said this to you?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: I believe that I heard this from Dr Goosen.  I do not know whether I heard this from anyone else.  I also heard from my own Attorney that this was his attitude towards Prof Koekemoer.

MR DU PLESSIS: But you made no attempts yourself, to really establish what the position was?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: I heard the same from two independent sources.

MR DU PLESSIS: Dr Van Rensburg, yesterday you also testified that Gen Knobel was in possession of these product lists of lethal toxins as you put it, is that correct?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: No, I said that I was under the impression that it was being used to motivate to the General for budgetary purposes.

MR DU PLESSIS: No, you said that those lists were given to Gen Knobel.  You went further and said that he is a Doctor and that he knows what was going on, do you deny every having said that?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: As far as I can remember, I made it clear that it was my impression that the lists were used for motivational purposes for the budget.

MR DU PLESSIS: At one stage you did say that it was your impression that it was used for the budget, but you specifically testified that these product lists were given to Gen Knobel, do you deny having said that?

SCHALK VAN RENSBURG: If I said something like that, I will withdraw it.

MR DU PLESSIS: Good.