A much talked about encrypted fax recording a R500 000 bribe to Deputy President Jacob Zuma was judged admissible *1 as evidence by Durban High Court judge Hillary Squires on Thursday.

The fax is the key document in count three of the State's case against fraud and corruption accused Schabir Shaik.

Other documents also judged admissible are two affidavits by Malaysian-based British businessman David Wilson, and an entry in the diary of Thomson CSF boss Alain Thetard. The entry notes a meeting between Thetard -- head of South African operations of French arms company Thomson CSF --and Shaik and Zuma in March 2000.

Wilson was formerly a director with the Renong group of companies, and was initially interested in the Durban Point waterfront development project.

His affidavit apparently contained evidence that Shaik used his connections with Zuma to try to become Renong's preferred black empowerment partner in the project. He was not successful in this attempt.

These affidavits relate to count two of general corruption charge against Shaik.

Squires ruled that some police reports and exhibits which were confiscated during search and seizure operations in Paris were inadmissible, while documents from Thales International Limited, in Mauritius, were also inadmissible as evidence.

The judgment comes just over a week after legal teams started arguing the admissibility of seven documents.

Apart from the two charges of corruption, Shaik also faces one charge of fraud relating to the irregular write-off of money in his company accounts.

After the court proceedings on Thursday, Shaik told reporters: "I have to answer a lot more questions about information and [about] a fax I have no knowledge of." *2

Shaik said he might have to give evidence himself, as part of the defence strategy.

Prosecutor Billy Downer SC said: "We've been on track all the way through, and things are still going according to plan."

He said the prosecution looked forward to hearing from the defence.

Downer said the three most important documents admitted were the encrypted fax, Wilson's two affidavits, and Thetard's diary entry.

The State has closed its case. The defence will begin putting its case on Monday.

With acknowledgement to Wendy Jasson da Costa and Sapa.

*1 Going Down - One, Two, Three

*2 More to the point, an explanation will have to be given as to why Shaik and Zuma were cryptically discussing educational donations at the meeting(s) of 10/11 March 2000, while the other person at the meeting, Alain Thetard, was discussing R500 000 per year bribe confirmations which later transmogrified into financial support from Thomson-CSF for Shaik's companies.

It sounds as if, on their versions, they were sitting around the same table at the same time at the same place, but not on the same page.

Or it could be perjury.

There again, it must be at least statutory perjury on the part of Thetard because in one sworn admission he averred that the meeting was about something and in another sworn affidavit he averred that it was about something else.

But is it an offence to lie under oath in France?