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

DR GOOSEN: Mr Chairman, I was involved in a project, not in a project, I was involved in reproductive work before we ever started the company, in two aspects.  The first one, and this is the only thing I can remember so let's elaborate on that, the first one was an embryo transfer project.  I did embryo work, it was one of my scientific interests, doing embryo work.  It is one of the reasons why I was also considered for taking the lead in the anti-fertility project, because of my knowledge in embryology.
 Now, so I, and I also published and I also was invited to speak on embryology in Australia and I was involved in embryology in bow(?) vines with a friend of mine.  I had a share in a cow which produced no income for us because she died and this even started before we started this company.
 I was also involved in a project of embryo transfer, inter-species transfer ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Doctor Daan Goosen, I'm sorry.  I think what is clear here is, you may have been doing all those things, I'm not even wanting to contradict you because I don't know, the issue here and I told you, all of these things have got a basis in law in which unfortunately I cannot attack.  I think what is being said here is that you tried to portray yourself as a person who guiltless, who was blameless, who was doing everything for the country, when in fact you believed in what you were doing but what's more, you stood to benefit from it, you were enriched by it.  And you were doing things that were less than honest ...[intervention]

DR GOOSEN: Mr Chairman, ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Now, I think that is why the specific questions are being put to you, like: "Did you ever use the facilities at that place in order to promote your own self interests, like getting money which you used for yourself"?

DR GOOSEN: No, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Potgieter?

ADV POTGIETER: I'm trying to understand the weight of this kind of debate, to sit an moralise about a penny here and a penny there.  This was a front company not so?

DR GOOSEN: That's correct.

ADV POTGIETER: It was not a normal company, a normal commercial undertaking although the appearance was created that it was a commercial undertaking?

DR GOOSEN: That's correct.

ADV POTGIETER: It is a place of about a hundred million rand, less than 10% had to do with anything that generated an income.

DR GOOSEN: That's correct.

ADV POTGIETER: In other words, it was a bit black hole which just gobbled up money, not so?

DR GOOSEN: Yes.  Mr Chairman, yes, this is exactly true and I have been involved with extra company operations which was not illegal per se.  This created a problem, this one was the one with the Buffalo Project which I did in my own time, I put leave there, there were leave forms for everything signed, for doing the project on my grounds.
 But when we moved into some grey areas and there may be some - I'm definitely not an angel, but when we pointed out that there may be grey areas now in this embryo projects of mine and my interests in the buffalo embryo transfer business to some day maybe gain from that and I stopped my involvement in the embryo projects.  In fact we had registered those projects as official Roodeplaat projects and I have given up my right to any profit from it.
 But there was a phase where I was busy with these projects and the time that I spent there I took leave for and during that phase and that time where we were busy in establishing the technology for the company's objective, for the purposes of studying these anti-fertility projects, we established techniques.  In that period embryos used in the Buffalo Project were handled in the labs of course and we have designed in the labs equipment, collection equipment which was used in some of these projects which was then later officially registered RRL projects.

CHAIRPERSON: Miss Sooka, a clarification question?

YASMINE SOOKA: Doctor Goosen, I think for me, what I understand that you may conducted work in that particular fashion but I think the question for me is, should you at some stage have made that clear to the rest of this company.

DR GOOSEN: Yes.

YASMINE SOOKA: Because I think the inference that is probably being set up for us is that those were in fact the issues that would give rise to the problems relating then to your dismissal.

DR GOOSEN: Ja.

YASMINE SOOKA: Because I think there is a sort of pattern, 1, that you utilised company facilities like having the building doing building alterations at your home without your in fact paying for them.  And then I think there is a second thing that is being put before us, that you conducted work privately without declaring that to the company.  And I think - I haven't heard that, that the third one would be that you possibly collected funds without declaring that either and I think those are important because they will go to your credibility.