Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-06-08

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: Well the efficiency after I took over Protechnic and before it was sold, we just put back into a scientist company some very straightforward business management processes.  Today Protechnic works very well.  Hazmat works very well in a new building on the highway.  They are still providing the services that an organisation like this demands, so I am quite happy with the efficiency of the companies.
 In terms of security what was happening before was, if I say it was a joke I wouldn't be lying, because I know that my security level with Dr Basson was very clear.  He said you cheat us, we kill you, and I thought it was always a joke until recently I realised it wasn't that much of a joke.  But I never had the intention to do anything wrong to him and to the system.  Remember in the beginning it was a wonderful project, and he had good motivation and a good reason to be. But after that the security lacked because - I was also approached by two South Africans that came from nowhere and asked if they could buy ...(indistinct) again, Protechnic at a certain time, and when there was resistance they just disappeared and it was -
 I mean there was this company with all that knowledge that could have been sold, I believe, for a lot of money to the wrong hands.  So I think coming from the era of sanctions I can understand the process, but the problem is when you leave too much to one pair of hands it gets out of hand.

MR VALLY: Were you still in charge of Protechnic on the 28th of November 1997?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: In 1997?

MR VALLY: The 28th of November.

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: Well I know when I sold it - I sold, I purchased Protechnic in 1993 and I sold it in 1994, June.

MR VALLY: And did you make a large profit?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: Did I make a large profit - reasonable.

MR VALLY: I asked you that last question because in the ten year report of Protechnic there's a message from Lt Gen D P Knobel who pretends that it was established as a private company, but you won't have any knowledge of that?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: No, I don't.

MR VALLY: Thank you, I have no further questions.

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Currin any cross-examination?

MR CURRIN: There will be no cross-examination from Dr Lourens.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr van Zyl?

MR VAN ZYL: Nothing thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis?

UNKNOWN: Nothing Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Dr Boraine.

UNKNOWN: Chairperson I only have one question.  Dr Lourens gave evidence immediately before you, were you here?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: Yes, yes I was sitting right in the back.

UNKNOWN: Okay.  So you know that he told us that when you bought the company you were very worried when you discovered that there was some, apparently money, unaccounted for, let's put it that way.  And he was you know very alarmed by that, and you've heard all he said.  Did he tell you, at any stage, as to where the money had gone?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: No he didn't want to.

UNKNOWN: Did you ever hear at any stage that it was actually money used for the manufacture of these screwdrivers?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: No much later, much later.

UNKNOWN: So what - I mean so he must have given you some reason why the money was missing?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: No he didn't. What happened is that my group financial manager started finding out about this amount of money missing being paid to an account which was actually an account owned by Mr Jan Lourens and I immediately expected fraud.  And when I confronted him on that issue, since he couldn't give me an explanation, nor could he - because he couldn't, I have never been in all these plans and these things so I mean I would never have accepted that a company that we just bought now has all these parallel activities that we know nothing about, and that cost money over and above.  So no, he didn't want to tell me and that is the reason why we separated, because there was a lot of pressure during two months while our financial manager, group financial manager was examining the accounts he felt more and more insecure and then he confronted me and I confronted him back and then he resigned and I accepted his resignation the next morning.  Because I could not accept to work with a managing director that could not explain to me where R200 000 left.

UNKNOWN: So you cut your losses.

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: I cut my losses, yes.  No I didn't cut my losses, I asked the Surgeon-General, I said I believe that I have a problem here because Jan Lourens is an excellent managing director and he ran this company in a wonderful way.  So it was a big problem for me to lose him.  And it was a problem I believe for the system, so I had to go, my main customer at Protechnic being the medical forces I went to my main customer and I discussed these issues with him and he told me to leave it.  Cut my loss.  And since he was my main customer at Protechnic, and he was responsible for more than eighty percent of the turnover of the projects that were tackled on a yearly basis, if he sees "leave it" I said I am going to leave it.  So it's again not the sort of thing that I could push on to.

UNKNOWN: So Dr Knobel either didn't know or decided not to take it any further but just said let's leave it?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: I think he just wanted peace and I think he was maybe starting to realise that there were a number of things that he didn't know about that was getting embarrassing.

UNKNOWN: Alright.  The very last question on this, who bore the loss then, the R200 000?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: Who?

UNKNOWN: Who carried the loss?

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: It stayed in the books.

UNKNOWN: Okay, thank you.

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: I carried it.  (Laughs)

CHAIRPERSON: Dr Randera.

DR RANDERA: Can you just clarify something for me Sir.  Earlier on you said, when you were asked about front companies and whether Protechnic was a front company, you said no, absolutely not.  Then later on you said Mr Lourens actually started talking to you in 1989.

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: Yes.

DR RANDERA: ..as to the various activities he was involved in.  I would assume part of that would be the front companies he was involved in.  Can we just hear from you what is it that you are telling us, did you know about this?  Did you not know about it?  Because clearly there must have been more to it than what you are actually telling us.

CHARLES VAN REMOORTERE: No not at all.  I think that was a process.  When I say between '89 and '92 is simply because these things happened during the time and Mr Jan Lourens just made remarks or said things in a context of the discussion that clearly indicated that there was something else happening, and the confrontation on what he thought that Dr Basson was doing came much later.  Really at the end I would say, '91, '92.   Remember I was still very close to Jan Lourens and I still am, okay, so there was a dispute there.  There was him feeling cheated because I was now thinking that he was a crook and him not being able to tell me or not wanting to tell me and then him starting to tell me things that I didn't really believe, so it's a whole sequence of events in time.