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

MR SWANEPOEL: When I went to RRL, part of my guidelines was to assist Daan Goosen and not to get rid of him, and personally I devoted a lot of time in discussions with him, in interviews with him and assistance to him.  All my planning I did together with him so that he could become part of the process and my point of view was that I wanted to improve his image.  When I moved to RTO, one of the reasons was, he went to RTO, but he had to report back to me, so I remained involved with him.  He came back from RTO, because there he was not available and he also hampered the contracts with Eskom and the Police and with the Defence Force.  We had to appoint another Managing Director, and I consulted with him again.  I withdrew him, or I drew him back to RRL to give Dr Goosen another opportunity to improve his image, and I made him head of the experimental animal section, but sometimes his people could not get hold of him because the one says he's there and the other says he there, nobody knew where he was.  And then in the end Dr Goosen used the company for his own personal gain and he also used means from the company, and I want to make this statement, and the evidence is there, that the builders who built RRL, he asked them to make renovations to his house and then he drew a subsidy for that.  This was part of the things being discussed during his retrenchment.  He understood that and he knew what the reasons were.  I have a letter in his own handwriting in which he says thank you for the way you handled this whole matter.

MR CHASKALSON: If my question were to say that he was approached by you after being forced out of the company and at some stage later you approached because the company was now in a crisis, to request his help, you would say that he was incorrect and/or lying.

MR SWANEPOEL: That's true, yes.

MR CHASKALSON: If I tell you that he made a simple suggestion, if you would like to turn this company around, put somebody in charge who knows the field, i.e., remove yourself, you would say that he was lying?

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes.

MR CHASKALSON: What do you believe of the quality of the science during your time?

MR SWANEPOEL: Please repeat the question.

MR CHASKALSON: Would you refer to your science at RRL during your period of management as good, bad or indifferent or incapable of categorising as I did not know science?

MR SWANEPOEL: I would say it was good.

MR CHASKALSON: How would you know it is good science if you can't say - if you can't tell us about scientific projects?

MR SWANEPOEL: Because I did not receive feedbacks regarding problems.

MR CHASKALSON: Can you outline for us why there seems to have been an interest at RRL in developing toxic chemicals that should be tasteless, colourless and odourless?

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes, for precisely the same reason as I've mentioned right in the beginning.

MR CHASKALSON: ...(inaudible) as opposed to have in any way using such a substance on possible people.

MR SWANEPOEL: As I've already said, how can we trace it, how can we observe it, how can we diagnose it?

MR CHASKALSON: ...(inaudible) outside the mandate of the company?

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes.

MR CHASKALSON: And you would explain the putting of toxins into cigarettes, chocolates, various liquids and other substance and a category of testing what could be done as opposed to a category of testing which weapons could be manufactured?

MR SWANEPOEL: I've already said specifically yes.

MR CHASKALSON: Can you discuss or pass a comment on the interest in certain toxin which could cause death, but which would not be located in a post mortem?

MR SWANEPOEL: I can't comment on that.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm just asking do you have an indication of how long you still want to be with this witness?

MR CHASKALSON: ...(inaudible)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Chaskalson.

MR CHASKALSON: Did you receive a payment at the time of the privatisation of RRL?

MR SWANEPOEL: Which payment?

MR CHASKALSON: The payment, did you receive shares in the company?

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes.

MR CHASKALSON: Did you receive proceeds from the sale of assets of the company?

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes, everybody bought shares.

MR CHASKALSON: What - how many shares you purchased and what was the purchase price?

MR SWANEPOEL: I can't remember the number of shares, but it was a par value.

MR CHASKALSON: Can you tell us how much you received when you redeemed those shares?

MR SWANEPOEL: Can I consult with my lawyer?

MR CHASKALSON: With pleasure.

MR SWANEPOEL: I will answer that question, I can't remember the specific amounts, but in the trust which I have referred, there was R4,5 million.

MR CHASKALSON: What you paid into that company, would you be able to approximate what that would have been?  Would it have been R1 million?

MR SWANEPOEL: No.

MR CHASKALSON: Would it have been R500 000?

MR SWANEPOEL: No, it was about R50 000.

MR CHASKALSON: ...(inaudible)

MR SWANEPOEL: I can't remember, but it was when the shares were bought, it was before the privatisation process.

MR CHASKALSON: In 1989?

MR SWANEPOEL: No.

MR CHASKALSON: Would you care to give us an estimate as to when that privatisation process took place?

MR SWANEPOEL: In 1991.

MR CHASKALSON: 1991, and when did you redeem your shares?

MR SWANEPOEL: I don't understand your question.

MR CHASKALSON: You received a pay-out of I think you said - you received a payment of R4 million, is that correct?

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes.

MR CHASKALSON: When did you receive that payment?

MR SWANEPOEL: You have to understand the whole process.  This process of privatisation took place over various stages.

MR CHASKALSON: At the moment I'd just like to clarify the amounts.

MR SWANEPOEL: I can't remember the specific date, but I think it was roundabout 1991, 1992, so we're talking ...(intervention)

MR CHASKALSON: ...(inaudible) something like R50 000 and a final pay-out of something like R4 million in a time period of something like a year or two years.

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes.

MR CHASKALSON: Does that not seem like a exorbitant amount of money?

MR SWANEPOEL: Mr Chaskalson, if you are aware and know the privatisation process and the various stages which it entails, I can give you a direct answer.

MR CHASKALSON: So you would simply say that you would probably have thought of it as a good investment?

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes.

MR CHASKALSON: Schalk van Rensburg discussed the fertility programme with us and a request that you made to him to release certain untested products to you.  Would you confirm or deny that?

MR SWANEPOEL: Deny.

MR CHASKALSON: Earlier on, and it's emerged repeatedly during this interview, you spoke about an MD and you likened yourself either to a hospital administrator or possibly even a president, and that you surrounded yourself with good people to make important decisions.  Would you say that that is correct?

MR SWANEPOEL: I did not liken myself to them, I quoted as an example of how structures work.

MR CHASKALSON: Correct.  Well leave the president aside and settle for a hospital administrator.  How would you think that a hospital administrator could perform his job if he couldn't give an account of the patients and diseases, the equipment used the modes of treatment, the drugs available, the duties of staff, or the experiments done, and their ethics?  Would you say he or she would be in a position to do that job well?

MR SWANEPOEL: Yes, Mr Chaskalson.  I was a medical superintendent of Military 3 Hospital.

MR CHASKALSON: ...(inaudible) about the fact that you were the Managing Director of a company which potentially could prove devastating organisms and which you had absolutely no knowledge about.

MR SWANEPOEL: I trusted my specialists.

MR CHASKALSON: Thank you Dr Swanepoel, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there any cross-examination, Mr van Zyl?