The prosecution began final argument in Schabir Shaik's fraud and corruption trial on Monday, describing the case which began in the Durban High Court in October as an epic.

"Unfortunately it has proven to be anything but heroic," said prosecutor Billy Downer. He quoted Roman lawyer Cicero, saying: "O tempora, o mores."

He then turned his attention to the "generally corrupt" relationship between Deputy President Jacob Zuma and Shaik which formed the basis of the first count of corruption against Shaik.

Downer said the country's constitution obliged Zuma not to have acted in any way which was inconsistent with his office or to have "exposed himself to any situation involving the risk of a conflict between his official responsibilities and private interests".

He said the State had succeeded in proving that Shaik had used Zuma's assistance to gain private business advantage. He said it was up to the court to decide whether payments amounting to R1.2 million made to and on behalf of Zuma by Shaik were bribes or "innocent financial assistance" to a friend and comrade with no strings attached.

However, Downer pointed out that the state believed Zuma assisted Shaik because "he was aware that his financial fortunes were entwined with Nkobi's."

Nkobi Holdings is Shaik's group of companies. Downer said the State had proved Shaik had employed Zuma's assistance in an attempt to gain business advantage in projects such as the Point Waterfront Development Project in Durban and the establishment of an eco-tourism school in KwaZulu-Natal.

Later it was the turn of Downer's assistant, advocate Anton Steynberg, who told the court that the revolving loan agreement of R1.2 million signed between Shaik and Zuma in 1999 "remains a mystery to this day".

He said the original of the agreement had never been produced in court or been subjected to forensic analysis.

Steynberg questioned why this loan agreement was only disclosed to Cabinet in 2001 and said all indications were that "this contract was never intended to be a properly binding document".

There were "very serious contradictions" in the testimony led by the defence's witnesses about what happened to the loan agreement.

On the second charge of corruption against Shaik, the State alleges that he attempted to solicit a bribe for Zuma from Thomson-CSF. This was in exchange for protection during investigations into alleged irregularities in South Africa's multi-billion rand arms deal. The fraud charge relates to allegedly irregular write-offs of R1.2 million from the books of his Nkobi group of companies, which the State says were bribes for Zuma.

At least eight days have been set aside for final argument and Judge Hillary Squires has yet to announce when judgment will be handed down.

With acknowledgements to Wendy Jasson da Costa and Sapa.