Here are the questions that Judge Squires must find answers to

Somewhere in Durban there is a bottle of bubbly, or several, on ice. The question is: Who will get to drink it?

Some of the potential celebrants have arrived in Durban over the past two days.

First was the prosecution team - the advocates, the investigators and the auditors who have spent four years investigating Durban businessman Schabir Shaik.

Shaik was already in Durban.

On their way were his brothers - Mo, Chippy and Yunis.

And clustered in their office at the tiny Durban High Court were the three men who know who will be quaffing the bubbly: Mr Justice Hilary Squires and two assessors.

On the wall in courtroom A was the clock that has counted every moment in the trial.

A significant amount of time has passed since Shaik's trial started almost eight months ago, and as the minutes ticked by slowly this morning, those involved will be waiting out the longest hours yet.

When Shaik went on trial in October, he pleaded not guilty to charges of corruption and fraud.

The prosecution has based its case on the allegation that a corrupt patronage existed between Shaik and his longtime friend and South Africa's deputy president, Jacob Zuma.

What Judge Hilary Squires and his assessors will have to answer, and were likely to spend the rest of the today doing, was whether the state was right - keeping in mind that it was for Billy Downer SC and his team to prove guilt and for Shaik's counsel, Francois van Zyl SC, to create doubt.

In short, these are the battle lines that Judge Squires is likely to traverse in his judgment today.

Count 1 The state said there was a "general corrupt relationship" between Shaik and Zuma. Shaik says he helped Zuma financially because of friendship. To decide who is right, the court will have to answer a number of questions: Were Shaik's payments to Zuma, totalling about R1-million, bribes or financial assistance?

Were the payments donations or loans? Do they qualify as a "benefit", as defined in the Corruption Act?

To what extent were the payments intended as a reward?

If the court finds that Shaik is right and the payments were a loan, the state insisted during final argument that he be convicted of corruption in any case.

"A loan facility itself may be a benefit. An interest-free loan is an added benefit. The fact that interest payments are deferred is an added benefit. The fact that capital repayments are deferred is an added benefit," Downer had argued.

"The provision of loans without security is not a usual commercial practice with banks. Shaik has admitted that he would not enforce the terms of the loan, and neither has he done so."

Count 2 The state says Shaik fraudulently asked for money paid to him and Zuma to be written off in his companies' books. Shaik admits that this indeed happened, but says he was misled by his accounting staff and auditors. What the court must determine is whether Shaik knew about and asked for the write-off, or whether he was misled?

Count 3 The third allegation is that Shaik solicited a bribe from French arms company Thomson for Zuma in March 2000. In return, Zuma, according to the prosecution, agreed to protect Thomson against investigations into the arms deal and to lend his future support to the company.

To prove its case, the state handed in a fax written by the Thomson representative at the meeting, Alain Thetard. The state says the fax and surrounding circumstances are enough to secure a conviction. The fax, according to the prosecution, sets out the bribe agreement.

The state further alleges that a series of subsequent letters and faxes were used to cover up the payments of the bribe money. Shaik says he never saw the fax.

He admits that he, Zuma and Thetard met, but says it was about a donation to the Jacob Zuma Education Trust - and that this is what subsequent correspondence referred to.

Judge Squires and his assessors will have to determine the answer to the following questions:

Does the fax correctly describe what took place at the March 2000 meeting?

Were the service provider agreement and subsequent documentation part of a scheme to clothe bribe payments to Zuma "with an appearance of legitimacy"?

Judgment was expected to start at 2.15 this afternoon and be broadcast live on e.tv and 702 Talk Radio.

For Zuma the day will be a normal working day at his office in Cape Town, reports Group Political Editor Angela Quintal.

With President Thabo Mbeki on a visit to Washington, Zuma will be acting president - the closest some pundits say he will come to being the country's head of state if the judgment goes against his comrade.

Tonight Zuma will be in Durban for a gala dinner hosted by Education Minister Naledi Pandor. Tomorrow he returns to Cape Town to meet Colombian Vice-President Francisco Santos Calderon and then flies to Zambia on an official visit.

With acknowledgements to Estelle Ellis and The Star.