Trial Report: Sixty-One - 4th report on the closing arguments

This report covers the period Monday 11 February 2002 - Wednesday 13 March 2002

The final phase of the State's closing arguments on the fraud charges was scheduled to begin on Monday, February 11. However, on arrival at court, Judge Willie Hartzenberg was informed that Basson had suffered what defence advocate Jaap Cilliers described as a "mild" stroke the night before. By agreement, proceedings were postponed to Wednesday, February 13, when junior advocate Werner Bouwer began arguing the State's case on the fraud charges. Senior advocate Anton Ackermann, SC, declined to participate actively in proceedings as a result of several acrimonious exchanges with the judge during the earlier phase, when he placed on record that, in his view, the judge was not interested in listening to any argument the State could present.

The written heads of argument on the fraud cover some 1 000 pages. Bouwer argued that Basson had seized every opportunity, during the trial, to romanticise and fantasise about his exploits as a "super-spy" who had acted at all times for God and Country. Bouwer said Basson elaborated on mundane business transactions in order to elevate them to the status of James Bond-like dramas. Bouwer said Basson had consistently displayed the ability to blend fantastic fabrications with objective facts, offering the court "risible" explanations in many cases.

Bouwer used the example of Basson's explanation of the poisoned chocolates to illustrate his argument. Basson had attempted to turn the apparent poisoning of his associate, Sam Bosch, into an account of his own importance and to illustrate under what life-threatening conditions he had to operate while head of Project Coast. However, close analysis of his version showed it to be laughable. Bouwer said that through the "sheer coincidence" which marked so much of the case, Basson claimed to have delivered a lecture to Special Forces operators before the incident, warning them against the dangers of eating the courtesy chocolates placed on pillows in hotel rooms, as these were a favourite target of foreign assassins. Basson claimed this is what had happened on one of his European trips with Bosch, and resulted in Bosch having a "psychotic" episode. Basson said the poisoned chocolates were almost certainly actually meant for him.

Despite her own denials in this regard, Basson had also tried to persuade the court that administrative assistant Patricia Leeson had been grilled by British secret agents, setting off a chain reaction of events culminating in a nervous breakdown.The fact that Basson felt compelled to embellish such an inconsequential event as Lesson having been questioned by Customs officers in connection with her British work permit, served only to illustrate the total lack of "real-life James Bond escapades" in his life, Bouwer argued.

Bouwer said Basson's repeated claim that he had successfully duped all the major international intelligence agencies for a period of 12 years, thus protecting Project Coast from scrutiny was inaccurate and that if Basson had failed to attract the attention of foreign intelligence agents, it was simply because his activities were of a personal business nature, and had nothing to do with espionage.

With regard to Basson's claims of ferrying huge amounts of cash from Libya to South Africa on behalf of the African National Congress, Bouwer said it was nothing short of astonishing that the present South African government had not afforded Basson the highest public recognition possible as a reward for his "heroic exploits" on their behalf.

Bouwer urged the court to exercise utmost caution in weighing Basson's claims of contact with Libyan officials, since there was no evidence to indicate any such links prior to 1993 or 1994, in other words, until after he had been fired from the SADF and replaced as head of Project Coast, or that any contact he had with Libya was related to anything except his personal business interests.

In the State's opinion, the version of his Libyan connections offered by Basson during his 1997 bail hearings was closest to the truth. The elaborate tale, offered during his trial for the first time, of a senior Libyan intelligence officer acting as his chief "financial principal" and being unknowingly used to advance the interests of the project, was nothing more than Basson's imaginative and most recent bid to explain away the damning documentary and oral evidence about his personal involvement with the WPW Group, said Bouwer.

Bouwer said the glaring contradictions between this version and those previously offered to the Office for Serious Economic Offences, Military Intelligence and presiding officers during Basson's bail applications, had simply been dismissed as part of a collective SADF decision to mislead various people. However, ANC member Sol Pienaar's testimony that Basson first visited Libya with him in 1993 had dealt a severe blow to Basson's concerted efforts to backdate his links with Tripoli to the 1980s. Bouwer said the court should also reject Basson's claim that he had met with Mandela several times prior to 1993, as it was clear that he had only met Mandela through Pienaar after being dismissed in the December 1992 military purge.

Not a single SADF officer, including former surgeon-general Niel Knobel, or any of the National Intelligence agents who testified, knew anything about any contact between Basson and any Libyan prior to 1993/4. Even Parliament had been told in 1996 that Basson was no longer an SADF member when he began making trips to Libya.

The way in which Basson's counsel conducted his defence came in for a scathing attack. Bouwer said Adv Jaap Cilliers had blatantly ignored the legal procedures and rules of cross-examination.

Bouwer said the full extent of Basson's deviousness was illustrated by the manner in which minor incidents had been dragged into proceedings in order to make a point for the defence, only to be radically amended or abandoned altogether as soon as the State produced another witness or document to prove its point. He said that while the defence was entitled to introduce any statement, during cross-examination, provided there was a basis for the evidence, and conditional on a witness eventually being called to testify about such matters, the defence had not, in fact, called a single witness, except the accused himself. As a result, numerous scenarios and explanations had been placed before the court without any corroboration or confirmation.

Bouwer concluded the State argument with a detailed timeline, showing that between the transfer of funds from Project Coast to foreign banks, and disbursement of the funds to various companies within the WPW Group, or the laundering of funds repatriated to South Africa for use by the Wisdom Group, there was simply no time available for Basson to consult, as he claimed, with his financial principals or take instructions from them on the application of the funds.

Bouwer said the recurring pattern was that Basson instructed Military Intelligence or Project Coast's administrative manager to transfer funds to a foreign bank on the basis of minimal documentation. Within a remarkably short period, frequently on the same day, the funds would be moved to an account in the name of a WPW Group company, on which Basson was a signatory, and used to pay for such assets as private aircraft and luxury properties, or as to be used as operating capital. The paper trail uncovered by the forensic audit, together with documents retrieved from the files of such witnesses as Florida attorney David Webster and Luxembourg businessman Bernard Zimmer, showed clearly that at all times, funds were moved and applied in accordance with the instructions of Basson.

The defence response to the closing arguments was largely a reiteration of the arguments presented during the acquittal phase of the trial last year, with the addition of a personal attack on the prosecution. Ackermann, in particular, was singled out for vilification, Cilliers accusing him of "coaching" all the key witnesses in the case and, by implication, condoning the presentation of false documentation.

Basson having been absent throughout, the defence closed its argument on Wednesday, March 15. Bouwer will not present a verbal response, but will file a written response with the court on Wednesday, March 20. On Thursday, March 27, Dr Torie Pretorius will offer oral argument on the sole remaining charge relating to the classified documents found in the four blue steel trunks.

The court goes into recess for Easter on Friday, March 28. By mutual agreement, the legal teams will return to court on April 8 or 9 to afford the judge a final opportunity to question them on any aspects about which he may need clarification. The judge is then expected to announce the date on which he will commence delivering judgment. It is expected that this will be before the end of April.

A veil of secrecy has meanwhile been drawn over Basson's medical condition. His advocates refuse to release any information to members of the media, and have offered only vague assurances to the prosecutors that he is "recovering", or "doing well". The most recent information indicates that Basson suffered temporary right-side paralysis and is receiving hypobaric oxygen therapy.

This report has been prepared by Chandré Gould and Marlene Burger. Chandré  Gould is a research associate at the Centre for Conflict Resolution working on the Chemical and Biological Warfare Research Project. Marlene Burger is monitoring the trial  as part of the CCR Chemical and Biological Warfare Research Project. The Chemical and Biological Warfare Research Project is funded by the Ford Foundation, the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung and the Norwegian Government. Additional funding for trial monitoring was made available by the Swiss Campaign for cancellation of the Apartheid Debt and Reparations for Southern Africa.

Centre for Conflict Resolution, UCT, Private Bag, Rondebosch, 7701, South Africa Tel: (27) 21-4222512 Fax: (27) 21-4222622 Email: [email protected]