Fraud and corruption accused Schabir Shaik once described the charges against him as being “Mickey Mouse”. But they were apparently serious enough to render him distinctly ill and unable to continue while testifying in his defence.

The Durban businessman stood down on Wednesday after a marathon 17-day session of testimony and cross-examination. In the press gallery at least, the impression is that, given the poor hand he was dealt, he played his cards surprisingly well.

Shaik retained his composure, although on a few occasions his evidence-in-chief appeared more like a cross-examination.

The carnage that many expected before his cross-examination ­ something comparable to former City Press editor Vusi Mona’s experience at the Hefer commission ­ did not occur.

Shaik answered questions quietly and without drama. He even politely thanked state prosecutor Billy Downer for asking certain questions.

Despite the long time span and the mass of detail involved in this case, his evidence was not obviously inconsistent ­ with a few notable exceptions.

By and large, Shaik stuck to the central tenet of his defence: he gave money to Deputy President Jacob Zuma as an act of friendship and not as an attempt to bribe; he knew nothing about the encrypted fax that allegedly spells out the details of a R500 000 annual bribe for Zuma from French arms company Thomson-CSF (now Thales); and his meeting with Zuma and Thomson-CSF Africa director Alain Thetard, referred to in the fax, was about a donation to the Jacob Zuma Education Trust.

He was forced to make several seemingly significant admissions during his cross-examination.

Perhaps the most palpable admission, conceded during his evidence-in-chief, was his lack of qualifications, despite company documentation stating that he is an engineer and a published author with a master of business administration degree.

However, Shaik turned this admission to his advantage.

When questioned about the second charge, of alleged tax evasion and not keeping accurate company books, Shaik blamed his accountants. He did not have the required expertise to keep good accounts, he said, and paid his accountants and external auditors, David Strachan & Taylor, to do this task.

Earlier this week he acknowledged he backdated two documents submitted to the Thomson-CSF Paris head office in a bid to secure money. The documents related to a service provider agreement between Shaik’s Nkobi Holdings and the French company after they won a tender to supply navy corvettes.

In his plea explanation at the start of the trial, Shaik conceded he had made a host of payments to, or on behalf of, Zuma totalling about R1,2m.

During cross-examination he conceded that he has continued making payments for Zuma, though this has in effect rendered his company bankrupt.

Shaik conceded information that could prove embarrassing for Zuma. This includes his testimony that he and Zuma characterised Zuma’s debt as “interest bearing” to avoid having to acknowledge it in the parliamentary register of members’ benefits.

While wrapping up his cross-examination, Downer reminded Shaik that the court had heard evidence from several people that contradicted his version of events ­ evidence that he misused Nkobi’s funds and crippled its operations, and that he was aware that writing off R1,2m as development costs was irregular, but still sanctioned it and ordered his auditors to hide the payments.

More damning were numerous accounts of Shaik seemingly using his economic hold over Zuma to secure political influence in business contracts and empowerment shareholding.

Downer suggested that Shaik and Zuma collaborated in removing Judge Willem Heath from the arms deal investigation in line with an agreement reached with the French, hoping to hide their allegedly underhand dealings.

Taken in full, the cross-examination was hardly a cartoon affair; it must have all felt all too real to Shaik.

With ackowledgements to Tim Cohen, Nicola Jenvey and Business Day.