The ruling against the Scorpions in the Julekha Mahomed case this week has effectively opened a new front in the battle involving former Deputy President Jacob Zuma.

Judge Ismail Hussain’s finding that the search-and-seizure raids on Mahomed, one of Zuma’s attorneys, were illegal has given the Zuma camp ammunition to launch further court actions against the Scorpions.

The ruling has also given Zuma the opportunity to argue that his right to a fair trial has been compromised.

During the hearing of Mahomed’s case, Judge Hussain himself questioned whether Zuma would have a fair trial, following the raids.

“What impact does [the raid] have on the question of Zuma receiving a fair trial if the director of Public Prosecutions is entitled to bring an application to search an attorney’s office and search documents that have relevance to the defence?” Judge Hussain asked.

In papers filed in the Johannesburg High Court, Mahomed had charged that the Scorpions had studied files relating to Zuma’s affairs. She argued that a person studying the files could gain substantial insight into the nature of Zuma’s legal defence strategy.

Mahomed acted as Zuma’s attorney at his bail application when he was charged in July. She has since withdrawn in favour of Michael Hulley, but still represents Zuma in other matters.

Judge Hussain said he was not convinced that the Scorpions had disclosed all material facts when they applied for the search warrants.

He said the warrants “were tailored in such a manner that it was one-size-fits-all”.

Judge Hussain said it was imperative that attorney-client privilege be kept in mind with search warrants of that nature. In the past, convictions had been set aside due to privilege being violated.

The judgment has bolstered the view of Zuma’s major supporters — the South African Communist Party (SACP), Cosatu and the ANC Youth League (ANCYL) — that Zuma will not receive a fair trial.

The three organisations were quick to respond to the judgment.

Zizi Kodwa, the ANCYL spokesman, said: “The decision is a victory for the protection of human rights as enshrined in the Constitution of our country.”

He said the Scorpions had abused their power and authority by misleading Judge-President Bernard Ngoepe when they applied for the search warrants.

“No one must be allowed to violate human rights under the name of pursuing justice,” Kodwa said.

SACP spokesman Kaizer Mohau said: “This illegal action by the Scorpions further reinforces the perception that comrade Zuma will not have a fair trial, and that this is a political trial.”

Hulley told the Sunday Times this week that Zuma wanted the Scorpions to return documents seized from his premises during last month’s wide-ranging search-and-seizure operations.

Having to do so would be a major blow for the Scorpions.

The Scorpions are appealing against the judgment in the Mahomed case.

The Scorpions’ raid on Mahomed had been described as critical to establish the facts surrounding a loan agreement between Zuma and Shaik.

Zuma is facing two counts of corruption relating to his dealings with convicted fraudster, Durban businessman Schabir Shaik, and French arms company Thales.

Mahomed testified at Shaik’s trial that a “revolving loan agreement” existed between Shaik and Zuma.

She also testified that she was the author of the loan document and that she had witnessed Shaik and Zuma signing it.

Mahomed had also testified that the laptop computer on which she had drafted the loan agreement had been stolen.

According to the affidavit of lead Scorpions investigator Johan du Plooy, which was used to obtain court orders for raids, the Scorpions needed to raid her home and office, “to try [to] obtain the original document and to forensically examine the computers to establish the true circumstances surrounding the creation of this document”.

In prosecuting Zuma, the Scorpions would have to show that the loan agreement was a “fabrication” and that it was designed to cover up corrupt payments to Zuma.

Shaik made payments to and on behalf of Zuma amounting to more than R2million. Zuma maintains that these were loans and were not given to him as part of a corrupt arrangement.

The Scorpions believe these could not have been loans as Zuma could not afford to repay them.

With acknowledgements to Wisani wa ka Ngobeni and the Sunday Times.