Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-06-12

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes, Mr Vally, you know you're putting the question as if, whether I would be informed whether we have developed cultures of Anthrax of something like that.

MR VALLY: Yes.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: It wouldn't be in that form, it would be:  "We are now embarking on the study of Anthrax" and that would a very complete study, it would be the literature study about how it is utilised in a biological weapon system, it's dissemination techniques, it's dispersal characteristics, it's pyrotechnic characteristics, it's contagiousness, it's toxicity, it's treatment regimes if you want to control it, it's a very, very complete study.

MR VALLY: Fine.  Let me just determine what you were specifically aware of in terms of what you've set out.  Were you aware of such a study into cholera?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Oh yes, oh yes, we have also declared that in terms of the requirements of the Convention ...[intervention]

MR VALLY: Salmonella?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: So it's pretty - yes, Sir.

MR VALLY: Paraoxons?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No Sir, Paraoxons are Organo Phosphates that are not declared in terms of the Biological Weapons Convention ...[intervention]

MR VALLY: Were you aware ...[intervention]

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No, let me just answer the question please.  But it would be included in the broad study of all Organo Phosphates which are classical chemical weapons, schedule one.

MR VALLY: So you didn't know specifically about Paraoxon?  You knew about cholera, you knew about Anthrax, you knew about Brutella ...[intervention]

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Brucella.

MR VALLY: Brucella I believe?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes, I believe so.

MR VALLY: Do you know about Monensen?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No Sir.  That detail was not discussed at the Co-ordinating Management Committee level or for that matter at the Administrative and Financial Committee.

MR VALLY: Was the intention into the study of these toxins I've referred to, just for defensive purposes to understand it's effects, if so, why was it necessary to produce them on a large scale if there was literature already available on it, for example Anthrax, Anthrax has been written about since 1942 or even before that.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Mr Vally, most of those organisms produced diseases that are well-known all over the world.  The technology of converting them into weapon systems is the subject of research, so that you know exactly how they can be altered, how they can be utilised within the weapon programme and how you have to defend yourself against them.
 So the type of study that had to be performed was to go into that type of detail so that your defensive system and your preventative protection of your troops in the field would be totally covered.

MR VALLY: So would you be given those reports?  Would you be told ...[intervention]

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: I've already answered that question.

MR VALLY: No, no, I'm talking about that kind of detail, you personally.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No, indeed not.

MR VALLY: I will come back to this because if the purpose is purely to study the facts of those substances, but I'll come back to this.  A lot of the documentation that you are aware of, that we are aware of in terms of this bundle of documents we have, talks about trying to make some of these toxins colourless and odourless, was that also part of your programme?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Mr Vally, given the nature of the conflict which existed at the time and the necessity to be equipped to deal with the perceived threat at the time, such research in my opinion could be justified.   However, if you look at those documents that you are referring to at the moment and you read each and every one of them carefully and you see what the comments are within those documents with regards to application and application techniques etc., lethal dosages and so on, then I will admit to you that looks highly suspicious of either abuse or the intention to abuse those substances.

MR VALLY: Were you aware of the quantities being produced?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Of course not.  I have already said to you and I said so this morning in my statement, that the research and development documents that were found in the trunks that I indicated to you, was in my opinion the research and development documents of the two companies involved had such documents that I'd never seen before 1997.

MR VALLY: And were you aware of toxins such as Monensen, which for us lay people causes muscle weakness and degeneration, breathing difficulties and death, specifically toxic to the human heart and difficult to detect?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Mr Vally, no, I was not aware of such substances.  When I was asked to look at the documents that have been found in the trunks, both Colonel Steyn and I analysed all those documents.  The analysis is contained in the report which is known as  Project Cloud.

MR VALLY: Are you saying that the development of such toxins were kept from you?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Of course.

MR VALLY: By who?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Well I think by Doctor Basson but I must say at the same time I did not expect to have that kind of detail.  I was satisfied that the parameters in which the research was being carried out was against the background of the mandate of the project.

MR VALLY: I understand that ...[intervention]

YASMINE SOOKA: Sorry, sorry Chair.  I'm sorry, you're giving us an answer which could have one of two meanings.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes.

YASMINE SOOKA: Now, either it was on a need to know basis and you claimed that you were then not informed because of that, or as the Surgeon-General you were part of the committee that should have had control and the person who should have kept you informed was Doctor Basson.  Now I would certainly like for myself, a clearer answer from you.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes, certainly.  Certainly you are correct, that Doctor Basson should have informed me if any research was conducted that was outside the mandate of the project as it was given, namely to develop a comprehensive defensive capability.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying, and I think just to round up that question, are you then saying that to the extent that you were surprised only in 1997 by the documents which were taken out of the trunks which purport - I don't want to put it higher than that at this stage, which purport to be evidence of the development of toxins and substances which were outside your mandate, to that extent Doctor Basson kept you in the dark about that process?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes, Mr Chairman, but you must allow me to qualify that.  I said just now that given the nature of the conflict and the perceived threat, it would be justified ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, I'm not asking that question.  I'm asking a question of fact.  If, as we now have a situation that in 1997 you get confronted with documents which in your informed opinion as a scientist contains evidence of the development of toxins and substances, the nature of which in your view went beyond the mandate of what you were supposed to be doing, and you say you were not aware of those researches, is it therefore your  evidence that you were kept uninformed to that extent?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And the person who should have informed you and did not inform you was Doctor Wouter Basson?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes, that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vally?

MR VALLY: Let's go to the: "Verkope List", and I'm sure you know it well, TRC 52.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes, you may proceed, I will get it.