Legal history will be made if Judge Hillary Squires rules in favour of four media organisations who applied to broadcast from the Schabir Shaik fraud and corruption trial in Durban.

Gilbert Marcus SC, represented e.tv as well as talk radio stations 702 and CapeTalk in their application in the Durban High Court on Monday.

SABC radio was represented by Brian Pincus SC.

Broadcasting testimony from a criminal trial has never happened in South Africa before. Both the state and defence have opposed the applications.

Shaik, a prominent Durban businessman and member of a well-known liberation struggle family, faces charges relating to soliciting a R500 000 per annum bribe for Deputy President Jacob Zuma in exchange for protection during investigations into arms deal irregularities.

At the start of the Shaik trial on October 11, e.tv unsuccessfully applied for the right to broadcast the proceedings.

This time round they have requested the right to do audio broadcasts live, delayed or in edited form, saying "no other criminal trial in recent history has such far-reaching implications for the nature of democracy and open government".

The television station said it would not have cameras in court while broadcasting but would make use of pictures, drawings or computer graphics.

Initially 702 and CapeTalk applied to broadcast audio extracts in their news bulletins and possibly in current affairs involving phone-in programmes, although Marcus said there was "no current intention" to get public debate on that. "To have 20 million amateur lawyers say if they believe or not?" asked Squires.

Marcus later said the two stations would only use sound bytes in their news bulletins.

The SABC said it wanted to broadcast edited packages on its 20 radio stations saying it was part of their mandate to broadcast issues which were of public interest.

Pincus said a witness had no right to limit the distribution of what was said in court and that the application was merely to get permission from the overriding authority, which was Squires, to fulfil their mandate.

He said "the majority of people in South Africa cannot afford to buy a newspaper" and a radio broadcast without voice would be artificial.

He said print reached one and a half million people whereas radio reached about 20 million people.

"The press contingent has outnumbered the public by three to one" said Squires.

Guido Penzhorn for the state said the broadcasters wanted the "cherry on the top" by getting an advantage over their print colleagues.

He said in all the applications there was "a situation where nobody can say what the real effect will be".

Defence advocate Nirmal Singh said all the applicants wanted to record selective parts of the testimony and the danger was that it might give an incorrect impression of what witnesses have said.

He said the "real mischief" was the psychological impact on witnesses that broadcasting the proceedings could have and that "the witnesses may not be as candid and forthcoming".

Squires has given no indication on how soon he will make a ruling on the matter.

The criminal trial is expected to resume on Tuesday with the cross-examination of KPMG forensic auditor, Johan van der Walt.

With aknowledgement to Sapa.

Simplistic Court Broadcasting Law II

It should either be all, i.e. full real-time video and audio (like the Hefer Commission), or nothing (like at present).

Procedurally, the trial is going very well at present. Neither the State nor the Defence have had much to complain about (apart from Mo Shaikh and Sipho Ngwema giving some soapbox orations).

It's far better just to let things be as they are at this stage.