"I did it in defence of an honourable man," Mo Shaik said on Friday morning. And that man was Deputy President Jacob Zuma.

Under cross-examination, the former African National Congress intelligence operative told the Hefer inquiry into allegations that Bulelani Ngcuka was an apartheid spy: "I went public with the allegations about Ngcuka in order to defend the honour of the deputy president of this country."

Answering questions from Norman Arendse, counsel for Justice Minister Penuell Maduna, Shaik said he believed that Ngcuka's investigation into Zuma and the arms deal was a personal vendetta.

"I believe that a part of this ongoing personal investigation into the deputy president by the national director of public prosecutions is because he is aware that Zuma conducted an investigation into him in the late 1980s," said Shaik.

He found it abhorrent, he said, that Ngcuka had on several occasions publicly stated that there was prima facie evidence of corruption against Zuma, which would not be tested in a court of law.

Shaik said Ngcuka had told the media that he intended to use a "Pontius Pilate" approach.

He then asked himself what the Pontius Pilot approach could be.

He said Pontius Pilot had solved his problem of how to get rid of "this Jesus, the wonderful person" by deciding to try Jesus as "a Jew in the court of Jews". Thus was Pilate able to wash his hands of the whole matter by saying: "The Jews found him guilty".

And so Ngcuka would destroy the image of the deputy president without charging him.

Shaik said Ngcuka had effectively destroyed Zuma's reputation.

He said: "I have a prima facie case of corruption, but I am not going to win it in a court of law' ".

Shaik also testified that he had not given information about the spy allegations to Maduna because he did not trust him.

On Thursday, the commission heard that in 2001, while Shaik was at a reception, Maduna had asked him if it was correct that his unit had investigated Ngcuka for being a spy.

Shaik then told Zuma about the incident, who told Shaik not to confirm the investigation and not to hand over any documents.

When questioned on Friday about the reliability of the information contained in the reports, on which he based his allegation that Ngcuka was an apartheid spy, Shaik conceded that it was all hearsay.

Further questioning led Shaik to admit that he could only go so far as to say "it was possible" that Ngcuka was an apartheid spy.

"I am prepared to accept that if you have any credible information put to you that nullifies any one of the assumptions I have made, I'm prepared to concede that the analysis that I made in 1989 may have been faulty," Shaik said.

The commission continues.

With acknowledgements to Caiphus Kgosana, Gill Gifford and The Star.