Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-07-08

CHAIRPERSON: Well that's it.  It appears to be the conclusion of these proceedings.  Much of what I would have said at the conclusion of everything has already been said in my intervention when Doctor Knobel was saying his piece when in fact he was entitled to say what he wanted to say.
 Ladies and gentlemen, we have come to the end of these proceedings and I think we need to thank everybody who has been party to these proceedings.  It has not been the easiest of proceedings to deal with because of all the sensitivities that attach to dealing as candidly and as openly with a project of this nature but still infusing into that process a responsibility that should make sure that we comply with the duty to inform the public without in a sense throwing out the child with the bath water.
 I'm concerned that it is the view of General Doctor Knobel that those in authority might feel that we have not handled these proceedings in a manner that would obviate proliferation but I would hope that after all is said and done even government will feel that we have tried as much as possible to handle what is really a sensitive programme with care and with sensitivity.
 There are particularly people who I would like to mention even if it is in their absence.  Professor Peter Folb made himself available as a consultant to the TRC at no cost, voluntarily, and that is something that I needs to go into the record as an indication of the preparedness by a number of people to be as helpful to the process as possible.  His expertise has been very helpful to our investigators and it is a matter of gratification to also understand and know that his expertise is acknowledged by his piers in the form of amongst others, General Knobel who himself is an expert in his own field.  We have to thank Professor Folb in his absence and would hope that these remarks will find their way to him as an indication of our appreciation for his services.
 We must also thank particularly the legal representatives of everyone.  We have been engaged in mini battles in the process of these proceedings with some or most of them but it has all been in the spirit of trying to do that which lawyers know best, representing the interest of their clients in the best tradition of their profession.   We would hope that altercations that have taken place in the process of trying to get to the end of these proceedings and revealing the truth will be taken in the spirit in which they were all engaged in.
 We have had to deal with the proceedings on the basis that pending the outcome of the High Court application we will not take in the period allotted to us, in other words today and yesterday, the evidence of Doctor Wouter Basson.  So as far as taking that evidence is concerned it is suspended only to the extent that we will await the outcome of the Court process.
 Speaking for the panel, we are of the view that it is not only in our interest and the interest of society and certainly the interest of the Commission but in the interest of Doctor Wouter Basson himself that his perspective and his testimony should be received.  I know this is a forlorn cry but to the extent that I can persuade from a moral point of view, his lawyers and knowing as I do that colleagues do not give instructions to their clients, they take instructions from their clients but if it is possible and it is within them to persuade him to come and testify, we would ask them to persuade him in the way in which they persuaded Doctor Mijburgh, that it may be in his interest to come and testify and that at the end of the day there is nothing to fear in giving a perspective, especially if that perspective is the truth.
 So we will not take the evidence of Doctor Wouter Basson at this stage but I want to place it on the record that we have not abandoned efforts to take that evidence, and the only intervening circumstance between us and that event is the fact that there is an application which seeks to stop us from taking that evidence.  Of course he can override that by voluntarily deciding at last that he wants to come before us, not only to state his own perspective but also in a large measure to clear his name in those respects where he may unfairly have been prejudiced by either the manner of testimony or some of the things that were said.
 Subject therefore to the recall of Doctor Wouter Basson, these proceedings are adjourned sine die.
HEARING ADJOURNS