The day of reckoning has come for Mac Maharaj and Mo Shaik,who take the stand at the Hefer commission of inquiry today, to prove their spy allegations against national prosecutions chief Bulelani Ngcuka.

They do so without the documents they requested from SA's intelligence agencies, which refused to divulge operational information and the identity of their agents on the basis that it would be illegal to do so.

Maharaj was unperturbed yesterday, saying they requested the files to help the commission, set up to probe their original claims. If judge Joos Hefer did not get them, "that is the commission's problem".

"I am appearing (before the commission) and things have not changed. The unavailability of the files does not affect me. What I said (about Ngcuka) is on record."

Maharaj said earlier that Ngcuka was investigated by the African National Congress (ANC) in the 1980s on suspicion of being an apartheid spy, and the investigation concluded that he was "a probable" spy.

This means that the investigation was inconclusive and that Maharaj and Shaik are likely to stick to this during their testimony today.

Maharaj, a former transport minister, and Shaik, a special adviser to the foreign minister, are two of the main protagonists in the saga, which has rocked government with its claims and counterclaims of espionage and abuse of office.

They are alleged to be behind leaking documents that led to media reports about Ngcuka's alleged links to the apartheid government.

However, their legal representative, Yunus Shaik, told the commission last week that his clients were approached by former Sunday Times journalist Ranjeni Munusamy to confirm the allegation. "At no stage did Shaik provide any documents featured in the e.tv interview or published in the City Press. He commented on the matter within his knowledge on an investigation conducted by the ANC."

The commission subpoenaed Maharaj and Shaik to produce documents that it believed were in their possession. However, Maharaj refused at the weekend to be drawn on what their testimony would be based on today.

The problem is even trickier for Shaik. As a former National Intelligence Agency official he is by law forbidden from divulging operational information and agents' identities and might be charged. He faces a maximum of 10 years in prison should he do so.

If the two deny being the sources of Munusamy's story the commission, which has faced setbacks over the refusal of the intelligence agencies to provide the required documents, might be forced to go back and first hear Munusamy's testimony before it proceeds.

With acknowledgements to Xolani Xundu and the Business Day.