Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-06-11

ADRIAAN JACOBUS GOOSEN: Yes Sir.  The research at the facility and the need to know principle and what must be done was a very interesting situation.  We had very broad guidelines on what to do and we had a reasonably free hand to do what needs to be done.  The guidelines I have explained about, which was the establishment of the evaluation facility and establishing a biological ability.  We ended up - not ended up but it developed soon that practically we have developed very, very comprehensive physical facilities, laboratories capable of handling research up to the P4 level.  Facilities capable of employing GLP, good laboratory practice; GMP, good manufacturing practice; which compares the iso-standards, which Dr Swanepoel claimed to have been - went to look for in the nineties, we've developed it in the early eighties because that was necessary for good standards.  We have agreed that if you are scientifically involved in this type of work it needs to be done at the highest level of quality you can do.  Because it's not stuff to be playing around with.
 Now we developed basically a few lines of, fields of research and I want to classify them as follows:
 Firstly, and this is excluding our testing side of it, but the research and development - firstly, we employed Dr Andre Immelman who was professor of toxicology, and it was a good move to employ Dr Immelman because the first thing I have asked myself when trying to identify someone to employ was the question of integrity.  Does he have integrity?  Because being involved in such serious matters I needed people with integrity.
 Secondly, scientific standing.  To do and to say you are doing toxicology work for the world you need the top toxicologist in the country - which he was.  
 Thirdly, we had a request and a  - not a demand, a "behoogte" a need, a need, given to us from Dr Basson for developing certain products.  Now I can put these products under the name of dirty tricks.  These are the individual things which we have seen listed here which are not weapons of mass destruction, this is like a pistol.  Shooting one by one.  Being a toxicologist Dr Immelman was suitably qualified and had experience in the toxins, toxic chemicals, toxic plants in a wide range.  And he was a top person for that position, and that was why he was employed as a director.
 The second scientific side we got going was the one of reproductive physiology.  And the reproductive physiology we earmarked Dr Schalk van Rensburg for, and there was a slight difference between myself and Wouter Basson.  I know he thought Dr van Rensburg was the wrong guy to be involved with.  He didn't tell me then because he approved his appointment.  Dr Schalk van Rensburg had reproductive experience and he was also involved in the micro-toxins, which is the toxic type of thing which was necessary.
 We earmarked Professor Riana Borman, who was working on impotency and infertility, specialising in research areas in those fields.  And they would start at that then the most sensitive and important project for us.
 And the third line which we said alright, we must give this attention was the one of the development of biological weapons.  Now the new generation of biological weapons is tied in with the genetic engineering field, and this is - and Dr Odendal has touched on some of these products when he said they developed an anthrax which was resistant to penicillin.  Now this genetic engineering, molecular biotechnology, recombinant products, these names are all very highly sophisticated science.  This is where you have to transfer gene material, which is the basis of life, the basis of everything, from one organism to another organism.  And that is very, very difficult work to do, and Dr Odendal started out a division in that side.  Now you don't establish that within one month.  There was no trained, no trained people in the country in genetic engineering and biotechnology.  Only one or two people in one or two of the universities were involved with this type of work.
 I would like to come back later when you would like to hear something about non-proliferation, on how you then really - what is the possibilities of this and how can one control it, if you would be interested.
 But that was what we set out to do.

MR CHASKALSON: Just almost at a tea break I would just like to quickly take you up to the period where you were removed from managing director.  Yesterday we heard from Dr Swanepoel who told us that when he took over the company was in, and I may not be using the correct word, but his description was that the company was in chaos, it was in shambles, there was a horrible state of disorder.  What is your feeling about the state of the company at the time you were removed as managing director?

ADRIAAN JACOBUS GOOSEN: Mr Chairman I really think it would be a waste of time for us to get into the mud-slinging between myself and some of my previous, or other friends and people.  The state of the company was the following
It was in 1985, the end of 1985, the beginning of 1986, we started, I started the 1st of November 1983 with nothing.  Myself.  By 1986, the end of 1985, the beginning of 1986 we have built and completed a physical facility, the laboratory side of it.  We have employed the core people.  We have traced them, employed them, and I can vouch when we started out good, honest, integrable, quality people.  We have employed them.  We had many discussions and studies in hand.  
 We had many projects to start in place and we were starting with the projects.  We did some work already.  We have spent in the region of just over six million rand. 
 And by the way I received R50 000 per annum when I got there, and I can remember it even yesterday and tomorrow and the day after, and when I left it was      R87 000 and the total package was about R150 000.  Excuse me Mr Chairman, but that was my salary.
 We had two audits, two full internal audits, two external audits from Pierre Theron, Coopers & Lybrandt, and they are still involved Coopers & Lybrandt in the project and they still have some of the figures and I think they should be looked at, this financial side of things.  I will explain that later to you.  But by 1986 we had two audits behind us and we can compare the queries on the audits between the period I was managing director.  You are free to do that.  But that was the state of the company.
 I just want to conclude that I know that Roodeplaat has been visited by overseas experts on a non-proliferation basis and they have evaluated the facility which was established under my management with my colleagues, but large inputs from my side, they have evaluated it to be amongst the best in the world.  Even better than those produced by the Russians.

MR CHASKALSON: Dr van Rensburg described the appointment of Dr Swanepoel as the end of the future.  Would you concur with that statement?

ADRIAAN JACOBUS GOOSEN: Mr Chairman I wouldn't like to blow my own bugle, I would just like to say it was nice for me to listen to Dr Schalk van Rensburg.  It wasn't so nice to listen to Dr Swanepoel.  I am a human being.  But I believe the stage was set for a good future, and I believe removing a person like me from the company was detrimental to it.
 I had discussions with Dr Basson.  I had discussions with Dr Neil Knobel and I had discussions with General Nieuwoudt on this change of management and how it should be handled.  Because I believe it was, for one thing, a very serious security breach by bringing in a completely unknown managing director, unrelated to the field at all ...(intervention)

MR CHASKALSON: By that do you mean that it would be difficult for the company to pose as a private company with somebody without the requisite knowledge at the helm?