On the eve of Jacob Zuma’s court appearance on charges of corruption, his lawyers have made a daring bid to force the Scorpions to abandon attempts to broaden the charges against him to include tax evasion and perjury.

And when the axed deputy president appears briefly in the Durban Regional Court on Tuesday, his legal team will oppose the Scorpions’ requests for adjournments for further investigation, another attempt to close down moves to flesh out additional charges against Zuma.

Zuma’s legal team on Thursday made the latest move in the intricate chess game with the National Prosecuting Authority in an application to have the courts order the return of documents seized in August from Zuma’s homes and the office of his attorney, Michael Hulley.

If the move is successful — the Scorpions have till tomorrow to file notice of intention to oppose the application and five days to submit answering affidavits — Zuma’s prosecution will be restricted to the same counts on which his financial adviser, Schabir Shaik, was convicted.

This will effectively allow the defence to focus on defending two charges, rather than fending off charges on a much broader front.

Zuma will have to convince the trial court judge that Shaik gave him the money as a friend and that he did nothing illegal for him in return, in order to avoid the corruption conviction the state is seeking.

In June Shaik was jailed for an effective 15 years on two counts of corruption stemming from a series of payments totalling R1.2-million he made to Zuma. Zuma was subsequently charged over the same payments and the interventions he allegedly made on Shaik’s behalf in return for them.

In papers submitted to the Durban High Court, Hulley and Zuma asked that the search warrant authorising the raid be declared unlawful and that all documents and computer files seized be returned to them.

In essence, they argued that the raids were a fishing expedition aimed at securing evidence to shore up a weak case; that they infringed on Zuma’s constitutional rights and his dignity; and that they violated his right to confidentiality in his relationship with Hulley, who he only retained after he was charged with corruption.

In his affidavit, Zuma said the raids were “nothing more than desperate measures to prop up an unlawful decision to prosecute”.

“When they took a decision to prosecute me, they must have been satisfied that there was sufficient evidence to sustain a successful prosecution,” Zuma said.

“The decision must have been made with due care ... it would be naive to suggest that the very gravity and import of the step and its consequences for the country were not present in the minds of decision-makers.”

Zuma also argued that he did not enjoy a good relationship with the National Prosecuting Authority.

“It has also long been public knowledge that the relationships between the National Director of Public Prosecutions and myself have been strained,” he said.

Zuma argued that the seizure of documentation to prove he had not declared the Shaik money to Parliament or the SARS — opening up the perjury and tax evasion charges — was not necessary. This information, he said, could have been obtained from both Parliament and the SA Revenue Service.

Zuma also argued that the raids deprived him of documentation he needed to defend himself in court. “I have no way of telling precisely what the state has gleaned ... my right to silence has been infringed.”

Correspondence between Hulley and Scorpions prosecutor Anton Steynberg was also attached to the court papers. In one letter, Hulley argues that both Zuma and the administration of justice would be prejudiced by any further delays.

“Any further delay would cause such perceptions to be maintained and would not be in [Zuma’s] interests, nor in the administration of justice,” Hulley said.

In response, Steynberg made it clear that the investigation was far from concluded and that no undertaking had been given that the investigation would be wrapped up by Tuesday. He proposed that the case be adjourned till next March, at which time a full indictment and forensic report would be presented to the court on a date set by Judge President Vuka Tshabalala.

With acknowledgements to Paddy Harper and the Sunday Times.