Former Judge Willem Heath smelled a rat the day he was told by President Thabo Mbeki that his Special Investigation Unit was not required to be part of the multi-faceted investigation into the controversial arms deal.

Now an advocate who runs his own private investigations company based in Cape Town, Heath told the Sunday Tribune, after testifying in the Durban fraud and corruption trial of Schabir Shaik this week, that it dawned on him then - in 2000 - that the true issues surrounding the multi-billion-rand arms deal would never be investigated.

"I was terribly disappointed," said Heath.

On Thursday the court heard from the former head of the SIU that there was no objective reason why Mbeki could refuse permission for his unit to investigate.

Heath, who said outside the court that the full truth about the arms deal would never come out, told the court: "I have no doubt, that if objective consideration was applied (to the matter), the president would have had no choice but to issue a proclamation."

Heath said from Cape Town on Friday that had the SIU been granted a proclamation, his investigation would have questioned the validity of the arms deal.

"It would have been our responsibility to investigate whether the tender process was corrupt, as well as the validity of the contracts - the true issues of the matter that would have raised questions about the existence of the arms deal, if there were any."

"We could have, as early as 2001, applied for a court order to stop the arms deal process if it were found that the contracts were against the interest of the country.

"But for obvious reasons we were excluded, because some people were scared that if certain information came to light, they would have found themselves in an unfortunate situation," said Heath.

Heath said it was now difficult, if not impossible, to stop the arms deal.

"I believe that the current investigations into the entire affair will lead to absolutely nothing. It is not in the jurisdiction of the current investigating agencies to investigate any potential irregularities in the tender process, or the validity of the contracts, and therefore many things may never be uncovered," said Heath.

Heath testified that he was contacted at the end of 1999 by former PAC MP, now president of the Independent Democrats, Patricia de Lille. She explained that she had information containing allegations about possible irregularities in the arms deal and wanted to hand it to Heath's unit to be investigated. But first the unit had to get a presidential proclamation.

He told the court that he had discussed the matter with the auditor-general, who published a special review of the arms deal in 1999. The court heard from government auditor James Edward van Heerden that they had concluded in this review that there was a deviation from acceptable procurement practices during the arms deal, for which no plausible explanation could be given.

He also said that it was advised that a special investigation be done into the matter with a specific focus on the contractors and subcontractors involved. Heath said that his unit based its application for a proclamation mostly on the irregularities discovered by the auditor-general.

Heath testified that the main focus of their investigation was to be the validity of the arms contracts and the "public interest" part of the deal.

He further explained that the unit was also initially included in the multi-faceted investigation asked for by the parliamentary standing committee on public accounts, before the public protector, the auditor-general and the director of public prosecutions said that there was no need for the Heath unit.

Heath still believes they should have been given a chance to investigate.

"The information that we had available was much stronger than mere allegations," Heath told the court.

The trial continues.

With acknowledgements to Santosh Beharie, Sapa and the Sunday Tribune.