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

DR RANDERA: Dr Basson, just one question, you joined the
army in 1975, and in many senses, from what I've been hearing today, you dedicated your life to this, to the work that you were doing, whether it be in the Medical Battalion or in the chemical and biological warfare programme.   Then, come 1992, at a very young age, I thought you were, you must have been 42 then, you're retired, by the President of the country, he didn't come to you directly, but through other means, and you hear that there was the Steyn Report, which you've commented on already, what was your feeling at the time? 
 I mean here you were, someone who'd dedicated yourself to protecting this country, and suddenly without any reason, or on what you say a flimsy report, you are dismissed at the age of 42, I understand you were brought in through other means back into the system, but officially you were dismissed from the army.    Now, again, just let me add a second bit to that question, I understand some of the other people who were also dismissed at the time challenged the decision. Were you one of those individuals too?   So, first of all, your own feelings about why and how you were dismissed, having dedicated yourself to this institute, and secondly, and to the country, and secondly were you one of the people who actually challenged the decision?

DR BASSON: Dr Randera, I'd prefer not to comment on my personal feelings, other than to say I was nonplussed.  It came as a great shock, I was not aware that it was going to happen.   In actual fact, not even the project leader, General Knobel, knew that this was going to happen.   In this evaluation of the programme by the so-called Steyn Report, nobody even took the trouble to speak to General Knobel, who was the project leader, and ask him if he knew what was going on at that stage.   So I can't say anything, but I have contempt for that report and I don't think it's worth the paper it's written on.   I also think that report affected the lives of several other generals, and, well not, and almost destroyed their lives and did a lot of harm.
 In my personal capacity I have never challenged this decision, for two reasons.   Maybe I was brainwashed, I was just a soldier and I accepted the decision of my superiors, if they say go, then I'll go, maybe that's a good quality of a soldier, he does what he's told.
 A lot of trouble also was done for me by people in the Defence Force in order to correct this faulty report, and it was often negotiated with me and I was told that this process would be corrected, and after a time I was reinstated.   I couldn't replace this, but a lot of people went through a lot of trouble to accommodate me, and this included certain government members, which I don't think it's necessary to mention their names, but it was handled on a very high level and I felt at one point that there was a true attempt to correct the faulty report and the facts, so that was one of the reasons why I didn't attack the dismissal, but I cannot think from my own personal experience it was a nice time in my life, it was not, and maybe we should look at my violation or my rights being violated.

CHAIRPERSON: And that brings us to the end of these proceedings.   It is quite clear to me, from all that I heard from Mr Vally, that he would obviously have appreciated it if he had had more time.   I also share that view.
 It may well be that some questions need to be put, and therefore I would want to excuse you on the basis that should it be necessary, in line with your offer, or the offer that was made through your legal representatives, to approach you by way of written questions, that you will find it in your - to be able to reply to those questions, so that we can have a broader picture of all the issues.   
 I must myself express my own gratitude to the fact that, whilst appreciating that you were not waiving any of your rights, you however felt it was necessary, when I requested you to do so, to reply to questions, even though you were not legally represented, and it is something that we have noticed and we take into account, and we only wish you could have had the same courage yesterday, or I wish I could have approached you differently yesterday and possibly we would have been where we would have wanted to be, but that is all now in the past.  
 As I say, for the moment you are excused, and should it be necessary for us to come back to you by way of written questions, we will do so.
 These proceedings are adjourned.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS