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

DR GOOSEN: Yes, I will agree that that is important Chairperson.  Let me put these two issues into context here.  The one was right at the end, in 1988/89 period, that was at that stage.
 The other one was in the beginning, in the 1985 period when we were busy establishing this thing.  And those days, in those stages the lines were not clear around managing this company anyway because we started on credit lines in developing this thing but these were all declared, everyone knew, I didn't hide it.  
 The first point, everyone knew when we started, 1 November 1983 I was involved in these two projects personally.  Like I could have had a farm in the Waterberg and farmed there for my own income, no problem.  Okay, then there was no facilities at the company and I pursued these interests of mine privately with the full knowledge of my colleagues, we talked about it.  This is one of the things we spoke about using as a cover.  
 If we could have succeeded in an inter-species transfer of an embryo, that is big science and big business, a world breakthrough, okay.  So that was part of creating a front.  We were confronted with many types of things in the initial stages of this company.  For instance, and it is applicable because this is the same thing, these activities of mine were known to my directors, it wasn't an undercover thing from them.   When we bought the farm where we established the company, the farm was bought and the agent was a friend of Doctor Andre Immelmann and Doctor Andre Immelmann got a kickback from this friend of his.  He received R15 000 and he came to me and he said: "Look Daan, what do we do now, we are now in private business, how do we handle this type of situation"?  I said: "Well Andre, I don't know, the first thing is yes, we talk about it and declare it.  You can't go back to your friend and say: no, no, listen we cannot do this, because we were under the impression business might operate this way".  
 We've discussed this and I reported this to Doctor Wouter Basson at the time and he said: "Alight, we know about it, let it go through".  And Doctor Immelmann in fact didn't receive the R15 000 in cash, he received a ram from this agent which was his friend.  We knew about and we let it go, it was R15 000.  But it was known, it was organised, this was the way that case was handled and this was even before I used limited facilities to freeze a few embryos, to develop a few collection tubes which was part, which was part of establishing technology for the company anyway.
 And then subsequent to that, very soon after that, we said alright, this might be a problem because it was then raised as a problem, we said: "Let's stop it", in earlier 1986, let me stop being privately involved in this company, in this endeavour of the buffalo embryos.  I was involved with a friend of mine who put in a lot of money in the Buffalo Project.  For him to put in, he put R50 000 in the project up to then which we started years before we started Roodeplaat.   And I went to him and I said: "Look, I cannot pursue this project with you anymore, sorry, you lose all your money, I'm sorry about that" and he accepted it, being a friend of mine.  And we can get him here to testify if it is necessary.  And then we registered this project as an official project for Roodeplaat.  
 And as you've heard we had the one indication that you could have done any scientific project, a scientist there, which you wished to, allowed to do an in-house project which is in your field of interest.  So I cannot see this being outside those lines at all.
 The second case, as I've explained again, was at the end of my service period and it was - you know Mr Chairman, at the end of it, I was for six months not allowed to be at the premises.  The people of the companies were for six months not allowed to visit me. Three months at least, let me see, from October to January.  I wasn't to have any contact with anyone from the companies.  And under those conditions this payment went by the by and I've testified to the fact and that is what I can repeat again.  
 I've been up front, it was known, it was registered with everyone, why would I do that?  Geoff Irons was there every day, a good honest gentleman, he was on the company's site every day, Sparmer knew about everything, everyone knew about everything, why would I do such a scheme?  It happened because I was under stress, I wasn't allowed there, I didn't see how I can survive for supplying for my family at that stage, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr du Plessis?

MR DU PLESSIS: Thanks Mr Chairman.
 You gave us a long story but the fact of the matter is that you did claim a subsidy for something you did not pay.  You did have private work done for which you used the company's facilities.  You say that in 1986 there was a problem, but not withstanding the problem you did it again in '88, not so?

DR GOOSEN: Yes, Mr Chairman.

MR DU PLESSIS: And it is these aspects which gave rise to the management crisis or managerial crisis, not so?

DR GOOSEN: No, Mr Chairman.

MR DU PLESSIS: Let's continue on a following aspect.  At a certain stage you asked General Knobel for assistance and General Knobel went out of his way to assist you, not so?

DR GOOSEN: Which stage are you referring to?

MR DU PLESSIS: The stage when you went to the head of staff finance, when you were taken to the State Attorney and to the "Ombudsman", and he went out of his way to assist you, not so?

DR GOOSEN: That's correct, yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you not take the Commission into your confidence and tell them that?

DR GOOSEN: Mr Chairman, I have no problem with telling the Commission about this.  I just think that my financial crisis which I'm still experiencing doesn't have much to do regarding the truth concerning the CWB Programme but I have no problem in telling the Commission about this.
 And can I just once again remind the questioner that we have a crisis in time here to get the truth.  I had this here as part of my personal notes, to tell about all the contracts but if you want me to, I can for the next hour keep you busy with that.  I have no problem with that, that is true what he says.  General Knobel and I were known to one another, we were on a reasonably good footing and I had a high respect for him.  And during these times of my personal problems I went to ask him for assistance because I trusted him and I had respect for him.

CHAIRPERSON: In fairness to the witness, I think that was tenor of the evidence as I understood.  He did say things about General Knobel about which you might want to take instructions but I heard him quite clearly on what came across as being his inherent respect still for General Knobel.

MR DU PLESSIS: That is not the point, the point is that General Knobel went out of his way to assist him and that he never told the Commission.  The question was just, why not?

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I think he has given a reply and I think the reply is quite satisfactory.

MR DU PLESSIS: Let's go one step further, did you have a discussion with General Knobel in his office after you were at the "Ombudsman"?

DR GOOSEN: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, because now I will put it to you why you did not tell the Commission about it, there's a good reason for it.  During that discussion General Knobel said he was sorry but he could not be of further assistance to you, is that correct?

DR GOOSEN: That's correct, yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: And then you threatened him Doctor Goosen, not so?  Then you uttered a threat towards General Knobel.

DR GOOSEN: Mr Chairman, yes, I can give you the specifications of that threat, I've been threatened often.

MR VAN ZYL: The question is simple Doctor Goosen, you said that you were pressurised for time.  I just asked you, did you threaten him, yes or no?