The "sly and calculated manner" in which Schabir Shaik had hidden the profit of "at least" two bribes of R500 000 paid to former deputy president Jacob Zuma by means of money laundering, was a seriously aggravating circumstance against Shaik, said Advocate William Downer of the national prosecuting authority.

Downer made his argument in the Supreme Court of Appeal where Shaik had brought an application for leave to appeal on a corruption charge that he and Zuma had been found to have had a "generally corrupt relationship".

Judge Hilary Squires earlier this year denied Shaik leave to appeal against this charge and his sentence of 15 years imprisonment.

Should the Appeals Court also deny Shaik leave to appeal, he'd have to go to jail for 15 years, even if his appeal is successful on charges Squires had given him leave to appeal against.

Regarding the fact that Shaik was found guilty, Downer said "every shred of circumstantial evidence" (of corruption between Shaik and Zuma) fitted together in such a way "that the whole cannot be ignored".

In addition, Shaik didn't attack Squires' ruling he was an unreliable witness in his application to the Appeals Court.

"It is clear these rulings (by Squires) were untouchable in the light of Shaik's frightening display as a witness.

"Shaik himself testified he had agreed to help Zuma financially to keep him in politics.

"I argue the scenario sketched by the evidence indicated a unacceptable system of corruption that was aimed at keeping Zuma in (political) positions where he could be available to promote Shaik's interests."

Regarding the sentence, Downer said the long period of time, during which corrupt payments were made to Zuma - September 1999 to 2001 - and during which "their plan was extended, executed and confirmed and after which payments were requested and made", was also aggravating.

Two Appeals Court judges will consider Shaik's application. One of them is apparently Judge Louis Harms.

With acknowledgements to Philip de Bruin and the Beeld.