Beleaguered businessman becomes Mr Affable — for a while

Immaculately dressed in a black suit, she sat in the press gallery behind her husband's lawyers along with her brother-in-law Mo, with whom she exchanged smiles and whispered comments.

Corruption accused Schabir Shaik launched a charm offensive outside the Durban High Court this week as he began giving evidence in his own defence.

The embattled Nkobi Group boss started his week beaming with smiles. Gone was the aggressive, impulsive businessman with an abrasive tongue of the past few weeks.

Instead, the world saw the affable, debonair Shaik, who stood aside to let his lawyers enter the courthouse first, before he greeted journalists warmly.

Inside the court his wife, Zuleika, previously absent from her husband's trial, made several appearances to stand by her man.

Immaculately dressed in a black suit, she sat behind her husband's lawyers.

Shaik started his evidence confidently, with detailed explanations of his relationship with Deputy President Jacob Zuma. In the witness box Shaik was a different man to the accused of the past 15 weeks. Dressed in a series of designer suits, Shaik's intonation was more Hyde Park than his native Greenwood Park in Durban, more Hilton College than Durban's Sastri College from where he matriculated.

His answers to questions from his counsel, Francois van Zyl, were littered with "indeed, so, M'Lord", "if I may say so", and "quite correct".

Tracing his relationship with Zuma, Shaik said that while Zuma had been an MEC in KwaZulu-Natal, he had been deeply involved in peace work, particularly in negotiations with the IFP.

At the same time, Shaik said, Zuma was under threat. He claimed there had been an "assassination attempt" on Zuma. But later, in response to interventions by Judge Hillary Squires, he conceded that the "attempt" was actually a "threat".

Zuma, he said, was so deeply in debt that he had considered leaving politics "so that he could earn the necessary income to provide for his family".

At the same time, Stanger businessman Dawood Mangera was applying to have Zuma sequestrated over debts to him, which would have seen the deputy president forced out of Parliament.

"I knew [Zuma] implicitly and the efforts he was putting in, in stabilising the political situation in this province. I, in fact, advised Mr Zuma to stay in politics, as the future of our children and our generations in this province would rely largely on the efforts he puts in and that I will assist him financially to the best of my ability," Shaik said.

"He felt quite assured and comforted... at least he has someone that he can fall back to, and such began the relationship of me having to assume some, if not most, of his financial obligations.

"This is not a man prone to live with Cartier watches and Armani perfumes and Hugo Boss suits," Shaik said, adding that the family expenses meant Zuma lived on a mere 6% of his salary.

But as the week progressed, Shaik's demeanour changed.

He complained bitterly about the prosecution making too much noise while working with their court files, and his answers became increasingly convoluted.

On Wednesday, resumption of the hearing after tea was delayed by a heated exchange between Shaik and his lawyers.

Body language during the breaks between Shaik and Van Zyl became tense and by Friday the two arrived at court separately, with their only visible communication being the exchange between the defence table and the witness stand.

Shaik's answers to Van Zyl's questions also changed. Earlier Shaik's answers had been elaborate to the extent of Judge Squires asking him whether he remembered issues or was "reconstructing".

By Friday they became muddled.

Van Zyl had to repeat many questions and to press his client for direct answers to the extent that the evidence in chief resembled a cross-examination by the time the court rose for the week.

As the week progressed a number of statements by Shaik raised embarrassing questions for senior ANC leaders.

He told the court Zuma was angry with President Thabo Mbeki and his predecessor Nelson Mandela over their view that Shaik's Nkobi Group was not a suitable black economic empowerment company.

He spoke of buying a car for now ANC KwaZulu-Natal MEC for Local Government and Traditional Affairs Mike Mabuyakhulu; of paying the rent for the ANC provincial offices in Durban; of being told by Zuma to negotiate with current Finance MEC Zweli Mkhize over the return of R900 000 he (Shaik) had moved from Zuma's account to Nkobi's Floryn Investments.

Shaik's evidence was most damaging to Zuma, with whom Shaik said he had "a close relationship, a very trusting relationship".

Shaik said his brothers Mo, Chippy and Yunus had been detained because of Zuma's decision to "exfiltrate" senior ANC leader Ebrahim Ismail rather than them.

Shaik also painted a picture of a Zuma totally dependent on himself and Nkobi for his survival, intimating that the deputy president's expenses came close to bankrupting the Nkobi Group.

Most importantly, Shaik contradicted Zuma's March 2003 answer to a question in Parliament in which he denied meeting Thomson's (now Thint) then South Africa boss Alain Thetard.

Shaik told the court Zuma had attended the meeting, which was the forum in which they allegedly solicited a R1-million bribe on which one of the corruption charges against Shaik is based.

•Tomorrow Shaik is expected to conclude his evidence in chief and will have to face cross-examination from lead prosecutor Billy Downer and assistant Anton Steinberg.

With acknowledgements to Paddy Harper and the Sunday Times.