Griller : Lead prosecutor Billy Downer put Schabir Shaik on the spot this week

Schabir Shaik’s corruption and fraud trial entered a phase of drawn-out trench warfare this week as the Nkobi Group supremo underwent intense cross-examination for the first time.

Like the battles of World War One, the war of attrition between Shaik and the prosecution was more about slow build-up and sniping than the blitzkrieg tactics of more modern warfare.

Far from the explosive exchanges anticipated by observers, the week was one of minute detail and repetitive questioning as lead prosecutor Billy Downer grilled Shaik on the major aspects of his evidence in chief.

Shaik had taken the witness stand last week in his own defence and concluded delivering his version of events early on Monday after the weekend recess.

There were, however, tense moments at the beginning of Downer’s cross-examination when he confronted Shaik over qualifications he had falsely claimed in both his CV and company brochures.

A clearly embarrassed Shaik told the Durban High Court that his MBA was false, as was his claim to be a member of the Engineering Board.

Shaik also conceded that a claim on his CV, that he was a “graduate of prestigious universities in Europe and the US”, was false, as was his claim to be a qualified engineer.

Questioned on his claim to be a “published author”, Shaik also confessed that while he had “produced research articles *1”, he had never been published.

Pressed by Downer as to why this false information was used, Shaik said: “I don’t want to provide an explanation to what really goes to having to develop a sense of confidence at an early part of my business cycle. I grew up with a family of brothers that are highly educated and qualified and I always felt that I had missed that opportunity in my life.”

This prompted Judge Hillary Squires to ask: “Was this to impress customers?”

Shaik’s reply: “Yes, M’lord.”

From there Downer launched into slow, meticulous cross-examination dealing with the first two charges against Shaik.

The first is a corruption charge based on what Downer calls a “generally corrupt relationship” between Shaik and Deputy President Jacob Zuma in which Zuma allegedly received R1.2-million for punting Shaik’s companies and protecting him.

The second is a charge of fraud, alternatively tax evasion, over Nkobi writing off the Zuma money, donations to the ANC and Shaik’s loan account, as development expenses.

Shaik’s defence strategy ­ as during his evidence-in-chief ­ was a combination of long-winded, convoluted answers stressing his filial love for Zuma; denials of any illegal activity by either himself or his former ANC “chief” and passing blame onto others, chiefly employees and auditors contracted out to Nkobi.

Zuma, he said, had intended to pay him back the R1.2-million and had never done anything illegal on Nkobi’s behalf. The illegal write-off, Shaik told the court, was merely the result of incompetence on the part of his accounting staff and auditors.

Shaik said that when he was alerted that the write-off was illegal, he had made the auditors reverse it. He said he had “rebuked” Nkobi financial director Colin Isaacs over this and was considering firing both him and auditors from David Strachan and Taylor once the trial was over.

With acknowledgements to Paddy Harper and the Sunday Times.

*1 Mainly into Bumiputera and which Sons of the Earth were worthy of it in the South African context.