Durban — Three crucial "interventions" by Deputy President Jacob Zuma into the business affairs of fraud and corruption accused Schabir Shaik came under scrutiny on the first day of Judge Hillary Squires' judgment in the Durban High Court yesterday.

Although the deputy president was not on trial and was never called to answer questions alleging a generally corrupt relationship with Shaik, the high-profile case potentially dictates Zuma's political future.

A guilty verdict today for Shaik on two counts of corruption and one of fraud could pave the way for the National Prosecuting Authority to bring a corruption case against Zuma.

An acquittal, and particularly an acquittal on the corruption charges, would all but clear the way for Zuma to succeed President Thabo Mbeki in 2009.

But most people, who expected the first day of the judgment to produce fireworks, were terribly let down when Squires narrated what they mostly knew.

He also did not give any indication as to where his ruling would go. Instead, he gave a detailed history of Shaik's entry into business, saying he was not slow to take up new opportunities.

Shaik's dealings soon gave rise to conflict between himself and his political home, the African National Congress.

This was apparently caused by a belief that he was using his ties to the party to strike business deals with the intent of keeping the profits to himself, Squires said.

The main questions that needed answers were: whether the first payments made to Zuma under the first charge of corruption were done with the intent of influencing him to use his political office to promote Shaik's business interests. If the payments were loans, as claimed by Shaik, the court still had to determine whether these constituted a benefit as defined under corruption laws, Squires said.

On the second count, one of fraud, it has to be determined whether Shaik was aware that the write-off of payments to Zuma had been done irregularly.

On the other corruption charge, Squires said, he would have to decide whether Shaik had indeed sought a bribe of R500000 a year for Zuma, in return for which the deputy president was to protect the interests of Nkobi's French business partner, Thomson-CSF.

Squires said the first intervention Zuma was alleged to have made was when Shaik called on him to clarify his black economic empowerment credentials and business acumen after a "misconception among the Thomson-CSF directors that Shaik was not black enough".

The second was the inclusion of Shaik's Nkobi network as the empowerment partners in the Point Waterfront development in Durban, and the third was Nkobi's role in the establishment of a UK government-funded tourism school.

Squires recognised that in tandem to the official tendering process in procuring arms deal contracts, "a constant swirling and undercurrents of meetings and lobbying … was standard practice". Director Pierre Moynot testified the ultimate choice of successful bidder "was always made at a political level" and securing that edge required cultivating relationships with people who had access to those high-level politicians, he said.

But Thomson-CSF believed that former president Nelson Mandela and his deputy, Thabo Mbeki, defined empowerment beneficiaries as "black indigenous South Africans" — and that as an Indian, Shaik was unacceptable. Thomson-CSF had therefore structured its shareholding in corvette suite bidder African Defence Systems, so as to exclude Nkobi.

With acknowledgements to Nicola Jenvey, Tim Cohen, Sapa and the Business Day.