Publication: The Mercury
Issued:
Date: 2005-12-15
Reporter: Tania Broughton
Reporter:
Reporter:
The
French arms company Thint won a victory in Durban yesterday when it stalled
attempts by the state to secure vital documents seized in Mauritius. South
African prosecutors want to use the documents in the corruption trial against
the company and axed deputy president Jacob Zuma.
The state needs the
originals of the documents - including a diary which notes a meeting between
Schabir Shaik, Zuma and Thint representative Alain Thétard - which were used in
Shaik's trial. These are being held by the Independent Commission Against
Corruption in Mauritius. Apparently they cannot be released without a court
order from that country.
Last Friday, state advocate and member of the
prosecution team Anton Steynberg served papers on legal representatives of Zuma
and Thint, indicating he would make an urgent application in the Durban High
Court yesterday in terms of the International Co-operation in Criminal Matters
Act.
He was seeking a Letter of Request, which could be sent directly to
the attorney-general of Mauritius, requesting the release of the documents that
were seized on October 9 2001 from the premises of Thales International
Africa.
According to an affidavit by Scorpions head Leonard McCarthy,
during that raid a diary was handed over by Thétard reflecting a "particularly
important piece of evidence" for the state.
"It appears from the entry
(for March 11 2000) that Thétard met with "J Zuma and SS" in Durban on that day.
Other documents were also seized and all will be evidence relevant to the
present prosecution," he said.
McCarthy considered it essential to get
finality on the issue and to obtain the documents for the trial against Thint
and Zuma. But Thint, represented by advocate Ryan Naidu, brought an urgent
application asking for the state's application to be struck off the roll.
Thint Director Pierre Moynot said in his affidavit that it was clear
that Steynberg had not intended to give formal notice of his application, and
delivery appeared to have been done "in the belief that we
had no right to interfere with that application" *1.
Trial
judge
He contended that only a trial judge had the authority to issue
such an order for a Letter of Request for mutual legal assistance. So far, no
trial judge has been appointed to hear the corruption case. Even then, such an
order could only be granted if the court believed it would be in the interests
of justice. He said the state was now expecting a judge to hear an application
which should only be heard by the trial judge. It also was expecting the judge
to make an order without hearing the accused in the criminal
trial.
Referring to events after the 2001 search and seizure, Moynot
questioned how, in spite of an undertaking by the commissioner of the ICAC not
to hand over documentation without the authority of a Mauritian court, copies of
documents had been released to South African officials during the
operations.
He also accused the state of attempting to use a "diplomatic
process" to circumvent and undermine the order of the High Court of Mauritius.
When the matter came before Judge Leona Theron yesterday, it was agreed, by
consent, that both applications would be adjourned. The state has until early
next year to file its papers opposing Thint's application.
With acknowledgements to Tania Broughton and The Mercury.
*1 The beginning of a trial of
legal technicalities.
It's going to be a long one.
But having
bribed their way around the world for decades in order to achieve an annual
turnover of US$10 billion (R63 billion) and having a 31% shareholding by the
Republic of France, Thomson-CSF have deep pockets.
Also because any
guilty finding will destroy their "multi-domestic" business, especially in the
USA, they will fight like a rooikat cornered by a pack of
bloodhounds.
Staaldak, webbing en geweer ('mshini wami).