'One person could get to Zuma'

The way Durban businessman Schabir Shaik brought plans for an eco-tourism school in KwaZulu-Natal to a halt was "unusual, unfortunate and tragically unforgivable", a Scottish professor told the Durban High Court.

Prof John Lennon said his dealings with Shaik and Deputy President Jacob Zuma had left him with the impression that "there was a degree of influence over Zuma" and that there was "only one person who could get Zuma's signature".

But Shaik's counsel, advocate Francois van Zyl SC, said his client will say that he had nothing to do with the collapse of the project and that most of what he wrote to Lennon was based on a misunderstanding.

Lennon yesterday gave evidence in person in Shaik's corruption and fraud trial after the State failed in its application to lead his evidence by satellite link from the UK.

Lennon told the court that he came to South Africa in 1998 to look at how skills could be developed to enhance tourism and thought it would be good to start an eco-tourism school in KwaZulu-Natal.

Lennon said he met Shaik after a talk he gave on his plans. But Van Zyl said Shaik will say he has never met the professor, and that he believes Lennon met his London agent Deva Ponnoosami.

Lennon told the court that he met with Zuma, who promised that he would write a letter of support that Lennon needed to obtain funding for a feasibility study. Lennon then returned to Scotland, where he waited "a very long time" for his letter.

While Lennon was waiting, Ponnoosami wrote to Shaik saying Lennon was experiencing difficulties "getting JZ's signature". Subsequent exchanges between Lennon and Ponnoosami led to Lennon faxing him a draft letter to use as an example of what was expected from Zuma. On February 4, 1999 the letter from Zuma finally arrived. It was faxed from Nkobi Holdings' fax machine.

The letter expressed Zuma's support for Lennon's proposal and suggested that Lennon make Nkobi Holdings their South African partner.

Lennon said: "We had South African partners. I wondered why Zuma would suggest one company in particular. I also found it unusual that a minister had to be helped to write a letter. I found it disturbing that it was faxed from Nkobi's fax machine. It did not fill me with confidence," Lennon said.

Van Zyl said Shaik will tell the court that he was brought under the impression by Ponnoosami that the letters (as they arrived in final form on Lennon's desk) were what Lennon wanted. On the same day Lennon received the Zuma letter, he also received a letter from Nkobi Holdings, confirming their interest in being Lennon's project partner.

He said he wrote back to Shaik that he was keen to discuss the project but "it was early days". He also advised Shaik to contact his SA agents.

This was followed by an angry letter from Shaik written by Martyn Surman. "I have to advise you that he (Shaik) finds your response insulting to say the least," Surman wrote.

"It seems a bit harsh. Shaik must be easily insulted," Lennon told the court.

Surman also wrote that it was only through Shaik's intervention that he finally received a letter of support from Zuma.

"There was an unusual and irregular implied reference here that only one person could get Zuma's signature," Lennon said.

Surman further demanded details on the proposed project within three days, "failing which (Shaik) will go back to Minister Zuma".

In a letter to Ponnoosami, written by Shaik, it was written that if Lennon missed this deadline. "I will seek to do what is necessary to stop (his) progress".

Van Zyl said his client will explain that he misunderstood Lennon's letter.

Lennon did not reply to Surman's letter. "I wanted nothing to do with them. Despite our best efforts, we got nowhere with the project."

With acknowledgements to Estelle Ellis and the Daily News.