Schabir Shaik's fraud and corruption trial will continue on Tuesday without audio broadcasts from the Durban High Court.

Judge Hillary Squires has reserved judgment on the applications brought by SABC radio, e.tv, and Primedia radio stations 702 and Cape Talk, to broadcast the trial.

The four media groups made the application after e.tv's unsuccessful application to televise the trial. Both applications are opposed by the state and Shaik.

The applicants are requesting permission to broadcast audio such as testimonies, recorded or live, to insert in news bulletins and current affairs programmes.

e.tv had originally submitted that it would also broadcast audio as part of a call-in programme. However, it withdrew when Squires remarked that 20 million amateur lawyers would use the opportunity to relay their views on the trial.

Before hearing arguments on Monday, Squires asked advocate Gilbert Marcus, who is representing e.tv and Primedia, why an "urgent" application was brought to his court when the media had been aware of the trial date since February.

Marcus said his clients were awaiting the judgment on televising the trial before opting for audio as an alternative.

Squires accepted this, but made it clear that he was only hearing the application as a result of the "acquiescence of the other parties".

Marcus began his arguments with an affidavit from Independent Democrats leader Patricia de Lille to show the court that not all the witnesses would be intimidated by broadcasts of the trial.

De Lille, who is expected to take the stand soon, states that she has no objections to her evidence being broadcast on radio and television.

Squires, who ruled on the TV issue that broadcasts are intimidating, distracting and an intrusion on privacy, told Marcus that someone like De Lille is already in the public arena and would obviously not have a problem with her testimony being broadcast.

Marcus assured the court that his clients would use discretion and broadcast responsibly. Demonstrating how the microphones would be set up in the courtroom, Marcus told Squires that the recording and broadcast would not be intrusive or intimidating to witnesses.

SABC legal representative Brian Pincus took a different stance, arguing that the SABC, as the national broadcaster, has a mandate to broadcast news items of public interest.

He said the application was merely to obtain permission from the overriding authority, which is Squires, to exercise the SABC's right.

Squires quickly responded, saying that the SABC has had a mandate for 80 years but has only now come forward.

Marcus commented that it is "unbelievable", that Shaik opposes broadcasts, not on the grounds that he will feel intimidated but on the witnesses' right to privacy.

State counsel Guido Penzhorn, who agrees with Shaik, told the court that radio journalists are trying to go one better over their print colleagues with actual testimony.

With reference to e.tv's application for permission to use audio from the court with pictures taken outside, or sketches, Penzhorn said that recording audio and visuals are both intimidating and intrusive.

He said the recording of testimony may prompt judgmental reporting, with usage of voices linked with unrelated images.

Shaik's advocate, Nirmal Singh, agreed with Penzhorn, saying broadcasting selective audio could give the incorrect impression to the public. Furthermore, broadcasts could psychologically affect witnesses, leading to nervousness and tension.

Squires has not indicated when he will give judgment, but Shaik's trial will continue today with the cross-examination of KPMG forensic director Johan van der Walt.

With acknowledgements to Nivashni Nair and The Natal Witness.