ADDENDUM
EVIDENCE: MR. JAN HENDRIK DU PLESSIS.
1. During its sessions at Port Elizabeth, Bloemfontein,Durban and Cape Town the Commission
received lengthy and detailed evidence on oath from a witness, Mr. Jan Hendrik du Plessis. The
evidence was critical of and hostile to Scientology.
2. At a stage when the final form of the Report had been settled Messrs. Couzyn,
Hertzog and Horak, Attorneys, Pretoria, acting on behalf of the Church of Scientology in South
Africa (Proprietary) Limited, forwarded to the Commission's Secretary a copy of a statement under
cover of a letter dated 17th February, 1972.
3. The copy of the said statement was a photocopy of a statement, duly authenticated,
and sworn to at London on the 3rd February, 1972, by one Jan Hendrik du Plessis. The covering
letter referred to in the preceding paragraph affirms that the deponent to the sworn statement
is the witness referred to in paragraph 1 above. The Commission has called for and has now
received the original statement. In addition a supplementary original statement similarly
authenticated and sworn to at London on 9th February, 1972, has been forwarded to the Commission's
Secretary. No explanation has been furnished to the Commission in regard to the circumstances
which prevailed when Mr. Du Plessis made the statements, ow he came to make them in London and
how the legal representatives of the Church of Scientology in South Africa (Proprietary) Limited
obtained possession thereof.
4. The firstmentioned statement consists of six typewritten pages. The opening
paragraph recites that the deponent reviewed the testimony given by him before the Commission
"after deep consideration" and then proceeds in the second paragraph to confess that the said
testimony was "biased and given with the sole intent to damage and bring discredit to the Church
of Scientology and to its founder L. Ron Hubbard." The ensuing thirty paragraphs contain a series
of specific retractions of evidence given to the Commission. The final paragraph reads:
"My testimony as listed above was chiefly motivated by the desire for
revenge, but after thinking carefully on the matter, I felt it would be completely
unjust to have Scientology judged on my mis-statements, no matter what legal
actions I am involved in."
The supplementary statement confesses dishonest conduct resorted to by Mr. Du Plessis in regard
to certain litigation between him and Mr. Hubbard.
5. It emerges clearly from the aforegoing report that save for referring to a letter,
the authenticity of which is not in issue, written by Mr. Hubbard to Mr. Du Plessis no reliance
has been placed on any portion of the evidence which has now been withdrawn. The Commission prior
to the receipt of the letter dated 17th February, 1972, considered that it would be dangerous in
the extreme to base any finding whatsoever on the testimony of Mr. Du Plessis - an approach
1