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

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: I think it could be quite a potential incapacitant because as I said, it is a hypnotic sedative and this could have a drastic influence on your central nervous system so it could influence the way that you operate and can react in a war situation, so I do believe that mandrax can be used as an incapacitant.

ADV POTGIETER: But is there any authoritative study or anything else that you rely upon for that or is it just your view?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: No it's just taking the structure activity, the type of compound into consideration.

ADV POTGIETER: So you say it's a possibility that it could be used as an incapacitant?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes.

ADV POTGIETER: But we also know that it's abused?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes.

ADV POTGIETER: It's sold and abused and so on.

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: But I do believe you know that drugs of abuse gets a bad name because of it's abuse and not necessarily because it's that drug.  It could have other potential applications.

ADV POTGIETER: So in other words, I mean would you go along with a suggestion that one could view the large scale production of mandrax in the same light as one views the production of ecstasy?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes.

ADV POTGIETER: It could have been for the same kind of purpose that you were fearing in respect of ecstasy?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes, because I mean any personal reservations I have about the end use of these materials are purely personal in respect, but as I said I was aware that I was working with ethical people, they were medical people.  I didn't know about any dirty tricks or anything involved in this whole CBW programme, so that was my view.

ADV POTGIETER: At about what time - just finally in connection with this - at about what time did you become aware of the tests with mandrax and cannabis, cannabinoids as it seems to be called here and cigarettes and so on?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: I actually - after I got arrested by the police, that was I believe on the 4th of February 1997, I got released on bail and then I went back to work and so on and I scratched around and I came across a report on this that was written Drs Psotta and Steenkamp.

ADV POTGIETER: At about what - what was the date of that report, roughly, if you can recall?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: It could have been 1987, about 1987.

ADV POTGIETER: Thank you doctors.

CHAIRPERSON: Dr Randera?

DR RANDERA: Prof I just want to understand motivation.   Here you are professor of organic chemistry you said, at RAU, is that right?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: That's right.

DR RANDERA: You join a company that you come to find out, subsequently because you had to take the officials Secret Act oath that it's a front company for the army.

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes.

DR RANDERA: That - first of all before that, was there any link between your department and the army, I mean in the time that you were at RAU?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: No.

DR RANDERA: Did you ever do any work for the army?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: No, we did some work for AECI who funded us where instruments and so on was concerned, but this was purely with a commercial company - we had no link with the army, no.

DR RANDERA: But you then joined this company ... (intervention)

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes.

DR RANDERA: You know it's a front company.  You're producing, or you're involved in research on substances - I mean you say, you're implying that it's for defensive purposes that you were involved in this, but potentially the substances you were investigating, researching were destructive, harmful substances, whether it was CS gas, whether it was ecstasy.  In all that time what was it that motivated you to join this ... (intervention)

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Well .. (intervention)

DR RANDERA: You said at one stage - sorry just let me finish - at one stage you talked about the enemy.  Can we just understand who this enemy for you, as a professor of organic chemistry, was?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Well initially when I joined there were already rumours that chemical warfare agents were used in Angola against our South African forces.  This was exemplified at a later stage by newspaper articles that appeared around 1988 I believe and I eventually went forward with this purely from the chemical challenge point of view because the projects that we formulated were nice chemical challenging projects.

DR RANDERA: Sorry professor, what I'm trying to determine is that you see, when ... (intervention)

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: I had one .. (intervention)

DR RANDERA: You play with molecules ...(intervention)

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes, but where ... (indistinct) (intervention)

DR RANDERA: Eventually your molecules end up in some persons body or in the environment.  Now you talk about ethical standards of these doctors, I assume that you too as a professor, had ethical standards ... (intervention)

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Oh yes, I also have a certain moral stance.

DR RANDERA: Now where was the ethics, can you try - that's what I'm trying to understand as I've been listening to you for the last three hours?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: My moral stance in this was that if you go in for CBW work, the idea here and I was told right from the start that we were doing work in a defensive capacity, in other words the idea was that if you had an enemy that would chuck chemicals on you, you could chuck it back on them and that's the stance that I took with this so I never saw my CBW work as an offensive thing that you would take this and on an unsuspecting enemy who hasn't got the capability of using CBW, going and chuck it on them.

CHAIRPERSON: Dr Randera, there was a question that you asked  to which I have not got a reply from Dr Koekemoer.  Who in your eyes was the enemy when you're accepting, as we should, for purposes of this questioning, that you began to believe that this was going to defend whoever against an enemy.  Who in you mind was that enemy?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: That was the Angola confrontation that occurred between the South African forces and UNITA which we apparently supported and which I did analysis from samples and I found out that some of those samples did contain chemical warfare agents.

CHAIRPERSON: Now let's examine that.  Are you saying that the enemy, as you saw them, were the Angolans?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And the Angolans which - you've mentioned Angolans and then UNITA?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Well you know, the Cubans were also involved in this confrontation and that was part of the enemy as far as I am concerned.

CHAIRPERSON: And UNITA?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: UNITA, you mentioned UNITA?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Well I understood that UNITA was actually supported by the South African government.

CHAIRPERSON: So did you see the UNITA movement as an enemy also?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Not really.  I didn't actually think in that context Mr Ntsebeza.

CHAIRPERSON: So who were the enemies, because I really - did you think about the African National Congress for instance, as the enemy?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: No, I didn't see it in that light.  What I saw was that we had to develop a defensive capability for chemical warfare purposes so ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Against whom?

JOHANNES MATTEUS KOEKEMOER: Whoever started chucking stuff against us.  If ever we would get into a confrontational situation where chemical warfare agents were used against us, we would in the first place have the analytical capability to test for those compounds and then retaliate if it was necessary.

CHAIRPERSON: Dr Randera?