Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-06-09

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: It does concern me, although as I said, I didn't know about a large scale production of mandrax.  It did concern me that we produced such a large quantity of ecstasy and following the newspaper reports and so on afterwards, only in hindsight I could say it concerns me more now.

MR VALLY: The thinking prevalent in terms of being involved in a secret project in chemical and biological warfare programmes etc, within the parameters of that kind of total onslaught mentality, and I'm basing it on your experiences within Delta G and discussion there, is it possible that people who were in senior positions would consider using mandrax on a large scale so as to neutralise the potential for rebellion amongst youth?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: No discussion has ever arisen in my presence which led to the premise that mandrax for example would be used to calm crowds or anything like that, no.

MR VALLY: Well I'm not talking so much about calming crowds as much as introducing it as a potentially recreational drug and thereby creating addiction?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: It would have gone against my grain, I don't like drug abuse and I would not have approved of it in the first place and secondly, it was never discussed in those terms in my presence, no.

MR VALLY: And when you raised your concerns with higher ups when you were asked to manufacture ecstasy and they - I think you mentioned General Neethling, he in fact tried to get you to improve your production facilities, processes.

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Well he discussed the chemistry with me and we differed violently where the chemical approach was concerned.

MR VALLY: The point I am making is that the issues which pricked your conscience, and you were thereafter overridden by more senior authority, would issues which pricked the conscience of your seniors, that's the impression we have?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: I suppose it should have, but on the other hand if it was earmarked for the pure purposes of conventional incapacitation and chemical warfare context, I don't think it would have pricked anybody's conscience.

MR VALLY: But the fact is you did find some encapsulated ecstasy?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes, but that was only after the fact.  This only occurred in 1997, in February 1997.

MR VALLY: And you were surprised at the request that you manufacture large scale quantities of ecstasy because it wasn't a very good incapacitant in terms of chemical and biological warfare?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: From my personal point of view, but on the ... (intervention)

MR VALLY: No, no from a scientific point of view.

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes, from a scientific point of view and what I have read in the papers, but I was overridden by my superiors where this was ... (indistinct).

MR VALLY: That's what I'm saying.

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes.

MR VALLY: And you not only were concerned about it, you did something about it, you went to see General Neethling.

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes and I also said that I would like to see that this does come from the Surgeon General, that this order and that's why I think that official order was written out.

MR VALLY: And did you do any research papers on the lack of effectiveness of ecstasy as an incapacitant?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: It hasn't been described in any of the papers that I had at my disposal at Delta G, as an incapacitant.  Some of the amphetamines such as MDA has been described in the literature as Psychotomimetic compounds which could be used as an incapacitant, but not ecstasy per se, no.

MR VALLY: Which is what you made?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: That is what I made.

MR VALLY: Was this not unusual in that you would be asked to research an item before production of that item started?  In this case you were asked to produce it immediately without having to research it.

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Well I was given a chance to investigate the possibility of making this and I was also told that I must make this sulphoxide compound as a front for this project and then I was asked to make it and at that stage too, Delta G was rather in financial difficulty to an extent that a large number of our contracts had been cancelled and they had financial problems so I went ahead and did it.

MR VALLY: Thank you very much Dr Koekemoer.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Vally.  Mr Van Zyl?

MR VAN ZYL: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no questions for the witness at this stage.  I want to reaffirm my position.  I can't foresee that there will be any questions, but should there be any, I will inform Mr Vally.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Prof Haysom?  No questions from Prof Haysom.

MR VALLY: Mr Chairperson I realised that was what happened yesterday regarding Mr Jan Lourens.  Mr Van Zyl's client is in Cape Town, he has been subpoenaed for the whole week.  I do not want us to be in a situation where Dr Koekemoer has got other obligations, is leaving Cape Town that we have to call him back you know either there are questions or there aren't questions but we do not want to be, whether intentionally or not, put in a situation where we're told we have to produce a whole lot of people on Friday or whatever.  We have made that concession regarding Dr Lourens but it should be made very clear, Dr Koekemoer is flying out I believe this afternoon and he has got other obligations, we cannot leave it open.  In terms of our subpoena we have to excuse witnesses, so I really would urge that there be clarity obtained on this viewpoint of we will be advised at a later stage whether they wish to cross examine persons or not.  Does it mean we have to fly with Dr Koekemoer back at a later stage?  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you want to respond Mr Van Zyl?

MR VAN ZYL: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman yesterday I explained the position regarding giving notice to my clients when incriminating things are said.  Nothing was said of an incriminating nature against my clients and that's why I do not have any questions to ask at this moment.  Regarding my clients, should there be incriminating things, my point of view is still the same regarding all the witnesses that not one of my clients were giving notice of factual incriminating evidence here.  I can give you the assurance that we will not ask people to recall witnesses, but I can't give up the rights of my clients.  This person only testified today but I can give you the assurance we do not want to call witnesses back if it is not necessary.

CHAIRPERSON: In any event, there would be an opportunity if findings are going to be made which are going to be detrimental to certain people, that in terms of Section 13, notices will be sent out and the relevant provisions of Section 13 would apply.

MR VAN ZYL: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman I do not foresee any questions at this stage, but I have to consult my clients.

CHAIRPERSON: Members of the panel?   Adv Potgieter?

ADV POTGIETER: Dr Koekemoer why exactly did you go and discuss the question around ecstasy with General Lothar Neethling?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Well in the first place this was declared a drug of abuse in the early 1980's in the United States and I just felt a bit uncomfortable about making such a large quantity of material which could possibly be a drug of abuse and that places actually an actual burden on whoever is developing that and manufacturing it to control that substance and I just wanted to make sure that everybody on the authority side was aware that we were involved with this project.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes, I think I understand your motivation for wanting to raise it outside of Delta G, but the question is directed specifically at General Neethling, why did you go to him specifically?