Daily reports about the trial of Dr Wouter Basson: 4 October 1999 – 11 April 2002 This is a record of proceedings in the criminal trial of Dr Wouter Basson, former head of the apartheid chemical and biological warfare programme. The trial took place between October 1999 and concluded on 11 April 2002. During this period, journalist Marlene Burger attended each day of the proceedings and made comtemporaneous reports available to Chandre Gould. Gould edited the reports and they were made available publicly. Since the trial was conducted in Afrikaans, these were the only reports accessible to non-Afrikaans-speakers and the international community. In the interests of ensuring that the trial record remains available to researchers and the public the Institute for Security Studies has archived the daily reports. The reports were made possible by funding received from the Ford Foundation, the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung and the Norwegian Government. Financial contributions were also made by Dr Alastair Hay of the Leeds University's School of Medicine, the Science Policy Research Unit of the University of Sussex and Amnesty International. Trial Report: One Dr. Wouter Basson appeared in court on Monday 4 October 1999 for the start of what is predicted to be a long and complicated trial. He is facing multiple charges of fraud, murder, conspiracy to murder and possession of drugs (ecstasy, mandrax and cocaine). Dr. Basson is represented by Jaap Cilliers and Tokkie Van Zyl, advocates at the Pretoria bar. Dr. Torie Pretorius and Anton Ackerman (SC) are prosecuting. The trial is presided over by Justice Hartzenberg. The trial failed to get underway this week and Basson has not yet been asked to plead. The defence team has raised a number of objections to the charges. In the first instance the defence has argued that the charges relating to any activities in Namibia should be dropped on the basis that Basson qualifies for a general amnesty that was promulgated on 7 June 1989, on the eve of independence by the then South African Administrator General. The amnesty protects all South African police and military members from criminal prosecution related to any operational activity in Namibia before that date. The prosecution will put its arguments next week. The defence has also objected to the conspiracy charges, arguing that it is virtually unprecedented for a person to be charged with conspiracy to murder when the murder took place in a country other than that in which he is standing trial. Once again this will be argued by the prosecution next week. It is worth noting however that there is a precedent in South Africa for this, set in the case against former policeman, Eugene De Kock. The defence has also raised objections to the bail application transcript being used in the trial. They have argued that an interrogation of Basson by the Office for Serious Economic Offences, conducted after his arrest in 1997 should not be admissible as evidence. It is unlikely that Basson will be asked to plead until the matter of the relevance of charges has been ruled on. It is expected that that may happen late next week. Should the defence win its arguments on both the amnesty and the admissibility of the application hearing, the repercussions would be that the charge sheet would have to be revised and a much weaker set of charges will emerge. Should the bail application be ruled inadmissible, it will make the states case on the fraud charges far more difficult to argue and they will not have a basis on which to question the version of the accused. Meanwhile, two days before the start of the trial, Basson granted American film maker, Andrew Jones a three- hour interview. It is understood that Jones is negotiating with American television networks for the sale of the interview. Trial Report: Two The Basson trial went into recess last week after a ruling by Justice Hartzenberg on 12 October. Court resumes again on Monday 25 October. In a 90-minute judgement last Tuesday, Judge Willie Hartzenberg ruled that six of the eight conspiracy to murder charges against Wouter Basson had to be withdrawn by the State. His ruling is based on his interpretation of the relevant clause of the Criminal Procedure Act, which does not allow prosecution in a South African court for crimes committed on foreign soil. Hartzenberg also found that, in any event, Basson could not be prosecuted for crimes committed in Namibia, since the amnesty granted in June 1989 (and extended in February 1990 to specifically cover all members of the SA and SWA security forces) had been recognised by the present Namibian government and thus indemnified Basson from prosecution in South Africa "for crimes which Namibia does not wish to pursue". Despite the fact that the same prosecution team successfully charged Eugene de Kock in 1995 with conspiracy to murder for crimes committed outside the country (attempted murder of Dirk Coetzee, murder of Vlakplaas operative Brian Nqulunga in what was then Bophuthatswana) Hartzenberg found that this had been tantamount to the State "creating a new crime". Since De Kock's defence team never challenged the charges and the matter was never argued, the Basson case ruling is the first in SA on this matter. The charges that have been withdrawn include Charge 31, involving a conspiracy to murder enemies of the state and own security force members who present a security risk. Actions emanating from this policy include the poisoning of 200 Swapo prisoners of war in a detention camp and the murder of five Swapo members at Fort Rev, Ondangwa - the only murder charges, which actually placed Basson at the scene. Basson will also not be charged for other murders that took place outside the borders of South Africa including those of Gibson Mondlane in Mozambique and Enoch (Knox) Dlamini in Swaziland. Also not to be heard is charge 61 involving a plot by an SADF hit squad (the CCB) to contaminate the water of a Swapo transit camp with cholera shortly before the Namibian elections. Hartzenberg upheld the State's right to prosecute Basson on Charge 45 - death of a Swapo member who was fed poisoned "jungle juice" in Owamboland but flown to 1 Military Hospital for treatment on the grounds that he had died within the court's jurisdiction. The fate of Charge 59 - hanging of baboon foetus in Archbishop Desmond Tutu's garden - is still undecided. The judge ruled that as presently formulated, it does not constitute the crime of intimidation, since no actual threat was issued. The State has the opportunity to reformulate the charge, or amend it. If this cannot be done, it, too, must be dropped. On Charge 63, also challenged by the defence, the judge made the extraordinary ruling (not requested by the defence) that while the charge may stand on the grounds that some of the resulting actions took place in SA (murders at Zeerust, etc) the defence has the right to object to all and any evidence that may be presented in relation to the six withdrawn charges. This could pose a serious problem for the State, since without being able to present a full account of the CCB's policy, methods of operation, etc, it could be hard-pressed to convince the court of Basson's guilt in regard to the remaining murder/attempted murder charges. Lack of this evidence would effectively remove the motives for the remaining 14 murders as well. The State could face a further major obstacle in that at least some of the secret witnesses lined up to testify in return for indemnity from prosecution may now decide, in the light of the fact that they are implicated only in the six withdrawn charges and/or are covered by the Namibia amnesty, not to give evidence after all. It would appear that the prosecution has a limited right to appeal against the judgement, which is likely to mean that the trial will go ahead with the exclusions as ruled by the Judge. Even though Basson has still not been asked to plead and his trial has thus not formally begun, Hartzenberg granted the defence's request that his bail conditions be relaxed for the duration of the trial. He thus no longer has to report to a police station once a week. The State did not oppose the request. Trial Report: Three The trial of Dr. Wouter Basson began in earnest on Monday 25 October with Basson pleading 'not guilty' to the 61 charges put to him. The prosecution announced that they would not be appealing the Judges decision to drop charges relating to activities in Namibia (for which Basson is said to have qualified for amnesty) and charges relating to activities outside the borders of South Africa. It is possible that the prosecution may appeal the Judgement at the end of the trial. In his opening address, senior prosecutor Anton Ackerman (SC) told the court that the crimes for which Basson is to be tried cannot be regarded as apartheid crimes since most of the charges relate to Basson's self-enrichment schemes. He conceded however that some of the charges contained in the second volume of the indictment and relating to human rights violations were politically motivated. Ackerman also pointed to Basson's luxury lifestyle implying that it would have been impossible for Basson to maintain such a lifestyle on his civil servant's salary. The prosecution said that evidence would show that Basson's "cover" of a prosperous businessman, used to set up Project Coast, was not a cloak he donned when acting in the interests of the SADF, but in fact a true reflection of his activity while building up a vast empire of business interests and valuable assets both in SA and abroad.