Whatever punishment Judge Hilary Squires hands out to Schabir Shaik the fight will not end there.

Shaik knows that imprisonment looms, but of the many words that have crossed the one-time economic advisor's lips in the past week since he was convicted - "I am sorry", were not among them.

In a sense saying sorry is a difficult thing for any accused person who wishes to appeal.

A confession on the stairs of the court might keep you out of prison - depending on the view the sentencing judge takes of such 11th hour tactics - but it is also bound to scupper any chances of an appeal.

And appeal, it is well-known by now, is exactly what Shaik wishes to do against the judgment who found him guilty of corruption and fraud.

As he sat, rather forlorn-looking, behind his counsel on Tuesday, Shaik looked more scared than sorry.

"It is because of people like him that we live in a democracy," his counsel Francois van Zyl SC told the court.

At times Shaik swallowed hard, nervously fidgeting with his pen, but the defiance soon returned. Before the proceedings started yesterday he shook lead prosecutor Billy Downer SC's hand twice. Under present sentencing guidelines, Shaik qualifies for a minimum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment on each charge convicted of last week.

The crimes for which he will be punished today were summarised as follows by Squires last week:

Count 1: Corruption, for having cultivated a "generally corrupt" relationship with deputy president Jacob Zuma.

Count 2: Fraud, for being a party to an illegal write-off of R1,12-million in the books of his Nkobi group of companies.

Count 3: Corruption, for brokering a bribe agreement with French arms company Thomson for Zuma's benefit.

Van Zyl on Tuesday argued that the court should not give Shaik the prescribed jail terms as there were substantial and compelling circumstances for giving him a lesser sentence - including his ailing health and soaring blood pressure.

Van Zyl also emphasised that the corruption charge, arising from what the court found to have been a "general corrupt relationship" between Shaik and Zuma, was not a "classic case of corruption".

But Downer asked the court to impose the prescribed sentences.

He said he did not understand how Van Zyl could argue that this was not a "classic case of corruption".

"Courts have said it time and time again," Downer said: "It remains an offence to pay an official to do his job."

"The corruption counts were directed at Zuma in his capacities at high political office in KwaZulu-Natal and the republic.

As deputy president, the office is a heartbeat removed from the highest office in the republic. Shaik's involvement in corruption at this level could hardly be more serious or damaging to the institutions of government and the interests of the republic."

This, Downer said, took Shaik's case to a "level beyond any authority I have quoted ... the effects are devastating," he said.

With acknowledgements to Estelle Ellis and Daily News.