Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-07-08

CHAIRPERSON: Let's get ready to start ladies and gentlemen.  This is a resumption of evidence being taken from Doctor Knobel, and who I have to remind is still under oath.

NEIL KNOBEL: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vally?

MR VALLY: Thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: I believe that you and Doctor Basson had an encounter yesterday.

MR VALLY: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Of the closest kind.

MR VALLY: I would request you to choose your words very carefully Mr Chair.

DR KNOBEL: Mr Chairman, you can imagine my concern, I mean I'm trying to cooperate with the Truth Commission and here Mr Vally is fraternising with the main witness.

CHAIRPERSON: I can appreciate your concern Doctor Knobel.

DR KNOBEL: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vally?

MR VALLY: Thank you Mr Chair.
 I want to ask you one question about TRC11 before we go on to the recent batch of documents you've brought to me.  Do you have TRC11 there?

DR KNOBEL: Yes, Sir, I can get it.  Yes?

MR VALLY: If you look at paragraph 3 in TRC11.

DR KNOBEL: Yes, I've got it.

MR VALLY: Now I need an explanation, you are talking about Project Coast that involved a number of aspects and activities including, you say
"Defensive and offensive Chemical and Biological Warfare; even a special operational aspect"
What was meant by that?

DR KNOBEL: Well the operational aspect referred to the development of CR and the incapacitating agents which would be used in a dual use capacity, both as a counter-measure or a retaliatory measure in the battlefield if necessary, as well as in the crowd control or riot control role.

MR VALLY: I'm trying to understand why special operational measure.  I understand CR gas would be part of the possible defensive, possibly offensive warfare capacity but why separately, separate operational aspects?

DR KNOBEL: Yes, I think it's misleading, there's nothing more to say than what I've already said Mr Vally.

MR VALLY: Well there is a suggestion that the special operational aspect had to do with possibly the toxins which were, we know now, distributed for individual murders.

DR KNOBEL: Well certainly that was not meant by this paragraph when I signed this.

MR VALLY: Okay.  And that letter is dated the 17th of May 1991.

DR KNOBEL: That's correct.

MR VALLY: Under the reference of Brigadier Basson?

DR KNOBEL: Yes, that's correct.

MR VALLY: Well let's go onto the new documents.  I'm now looking at J3.

DR KNOBEL: Yes Sir?

MR VALLY: Do you have it in front of you?

DR KNOBEL: I'm not sure Mr Vally, I've got the Appendix J but your numbering is not my numbering, so maybe if you'll just tell me which document you're referring to.

MR VALLY: Certainly.  This is the minutes of the Co-ordinating Committee Meeting of the 29th of March 1994.

DR KNOBEL: Alright, I've got it.

MR VALLY: Now my first question is this, paragraph 3 -I'm sorry, paragraph 2 rather, first.  There's reference to
"The Surgeon General"
which is yourself:
"will check with the PG"
and I assume that's the Attorney General:
"as to what their investigations have shown and where this case stands"
But the heading to that refers to previous minutes and it talks about the destruction of samples, can you just elucidate on this matter, what was it about?

DR KNOBEL: Yes, let me just go back to the previous minutes Mr Vally.  If you look at the previous minutes Mr Vally, dated the 9th of January - oh no, I beg your pardon, that's not right, let me just get back to that one, when the substances were destroyed, the substances we discussed yesterday, there was a requirement both from the Auditor General as to the value of the substances that had been destroyed.  For that we had to obtain a value certificate, which I think is added or is attached to the destruction certificate and which ultimately led to General Meiring having to submit to the Auditor General a letter in which he says what the true value was.  That is attached to the documents here and I think you may have seen it.
 At the same time the Attorney General's office, as far as I can recall, required about the destruction and whether we could provide the necessary report.  If you look at the minutes of January '95 which follows the meeting that you are referring to you will see that we were still waiting for a written report from the police so that we could provide ultimately a complete report to the Attorney General.  And you will see it also refers there to the Auditor General which also wants a value certificate of the substances that had been destroyed.

MR VALLY: The question is, why was the Attorney General involved regarding the destruction of samples?  This is now in March 1994.

DR KNOBEL: I think it was, if I recall correctly, it was because all these substances were restricted substances and they wanted to have proof that it was in fact destroyed.  For the same reason that you are also concerned about whether it was destroyed or not, the fact that they were restricted substances.

MR VALLY: Let's go on.  We're still busy with J3.  Now paragraph 3
"Data slegging"(?)
This is the reference to the special safe which was created wherein these optical discs were finally put in, is that correct?

DR KNOBEL: That's correct.

MR VALLY: Paragraph 7, here you say that you had dealt with General Regley of the Swiss, it says: "Inligtingsdiens"
Can we, if the spelling is correct, can we assume that's Swiss Intelligence?

DR KNOBEL: Yes, that's correct.

MR VALLY: Regarding Doctor Basson's or Brigadier Basson's statements and you were convinced that the money was lost and you say that the case against Brigadier Basson was closed on the 22nd of April 1994, and this in Switzerland I assume?

DR KNOBEL: That's correct.

MR VALLY: How much money was lost here?

DR KNOBEL: Oh dear Mr Vally, I have to ...[intervention]

MR VALLY: Alright.

DR KNOBEL: I think it was three and a half million rands in round figures but if you want me to explain what is going on here ...[intervention]

MR VALLY: It will help when we come to those transactions later on.  That's got to do with the Croatian transactions?

DR KNOBEL: This is the Chicane transaction.

MR VALLY: Right we'll go through that in more detail shortly.

DR KNOBEL: Right.

MR VALLY: Let's go to paragraph 10, the heading above it is
"Item 4: Protechnic Oorname"

DR KNOBEL: Yes.

MR VALLY: Protechnic Take-over.  Now you were here when Doctor Mijburgh was giving evidence and he stated that only Delta G was a military front company, the other companies such as Medchem Technologies of which Delta G was a wholly owned subsidiary.

DR KNOBEL: Yes.

MR VALLY: It was not a military front company?

DR KNOBEL: That's right.

MR VALLY: Looking at the details set down under paragraph 10, can I understand this: you would have a contract with the company, Protechnic for example, and I say: "you", I mean the Defence Force.

DR KNOBEL: Yes.

MR VALLY: You decided that this project has to end, would you as a matter of course then pay out the remainder of the contract?

DR KNOBEL: No, not necessarily.

MR VALLY: Now this is what appears to have happened regarding Protechnic.

DR KNOBEL: In paragraph 10(b)?

MR VALLY: Yes.

DR KNOBEL: Mr Vally, I've been trying to explain to you from the beginning that Protechnic was not a front company.

MR VALLY: Yes.

DR KNOBEL: If you will allow me, in your own documentation, I think it's TRC10, if you will allow me just to deal with this issue a little bit.

MR VALLY: Sure.  Understand my question, my question is that all these companies with which you had contracts once Project Coast ended, were they paid in terms of what the remainder of the contract value was?