The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) wants to postpone Jacob Zuma’s corruption trial until next February, a development that could see Zuma still embroiled in court when the African National Congress (ANC) succession race is decided in December next year.

In a confidential letter sent to KwaZulu-Natal judge-president Vuka Tshabalala this week, the NPA signaled its intent to apply for a further postponement on July 31, the date set down last October for the start of the trial.

The letter, written by Anton Steinberg, deputy director of public prosecutions in KwaZulu-Natal, was also addressed to Zuma’s lawyers, Michael Hulley & Associates, and to Shamin Rampersad & Associates, the lawyers acting for French armaments company Thint.

Thint was charged along with Zuma last year following the corruption and fraud conviction of Zuma’s friend and former financial adviser, Schabir Shaik.

“We received the letter on Thursday and are still consulting with the client on our response,” said Zuma’s attorney, Michael Hulley. He said he would respond to the NPA’s request for an adjournment early next week.

However, Hulley said his standing instruction from Zuma was that the matter “should proceed expeditiously”, pointing to a possible standoff between the state and the defence when the trial is due to start.

Thint’s lawyer, Ajay Sooklal, said he was still “awaiting instruction” from Thint on how to respond to the state’s request.

NPA spokesman Makhosini Nkosi said prosecutors would not be ready to try the case in July, but could not confirm that Steinberg had written a letter to the defence.

In the letter, it is understood, Steinberg argues that it would be in “everyone’s interests that agreement be reached on an adjournment”. The NPA’s ability to proceed with the trial has been “hindered” by a raft of legal applications and appeals launched late last year and earlier this year. These could all have an impact on finalising the charges to be faced by Zuma and Thint.

Among the “hindrances” Steinberg identified are:

?The NPA’s appeal against two court decisions setting aside search warrants issued last year by Transvaal judge-president Bernard Ngoepe. The warrants were used for a swoop on Zuma, his lawyers and a host of financial benefactors in August last year;

?Thint’s challenge to a similar warrant the Scorpions used to raid Thint’s South African premises;

?A court challenge from Pierre Moynot, the CE of Thint SA, against the “unlawful execution” of the search warrant;

?A pending application to commit the authorities in Mauritius, where Thint has offices, to release material that could help in the prosecution of Thint in SA;

?An impending forensic report from audit firm KPMG, held in abeyance because of the uncertain legal status of the documents seized in last August’s raids; and

?Shaik’s appeal against his various convictions, set to be heard in the Supreme Court of Appeal next month.

The state was also granted leave to appeal a ruling by Johannesburg High Court judge Ismail Hussain ordering the NPA to return documents seized from Julekha Mohamed, one of Zuma’s lawyers. The matter, which turns on divergent interpretations of the NPA Act, will be heard by a full bench of the Supreme Court of Appeal, though no date has been set.

In his letter, Steinberg argues the defence teams for Zuma and Thint will need time to “study” KPMG’s forensic report once it is ready. In light of the above, the trial cannot proceed until at least February 2007.

This is likely to be strongly opposed by both defence teams. They are likely to lodge counter-applications asking the court either to proceed with the trial or to strike the matter off the roll. In an application filed earlier this year, Hulley argued Zuma’s political career was “prejudiced” by the constant delays. The matter needed to be concluded so that Zuma could compete on a fair footing in the succession tussle currently under way in the ruling party, he said.

The defence teams’ emerging strategy seems to be centred on preventing the case coming to trial. This is based on two tactics: embroiling the state in numerous legal applications, most of which, if successful, would rob the state of access to critical evidence; alternatively, to force the state to start the trial with diminished admissibility of some of the evidence gathered during the disputed raids.

In the case of Zuma, this will be simultaneously accompanied by attempts to strike the matter off the court roll because of the prejudice allegedly already done to his political career. Zuma has also argued that authorities have investigated him since 2000, so there is no excuse for any further delays in his trial.

It is unlikely the court will agree to a dismissal of the charges. Nor will the state be forced to proceed with its case on July 31. Sources close to the state’s case say the “worst-case scenario” is that the judge will grant one final postponement, which would still give the state “at least six months” to finalise its case. There would be no high court dates available to hear the matter until early next year, they say.

Moreover, the NPA maintains that a formal investigation against Zuma started only in June last year after his axing from the cabinet by President Thabo Mbeki; all previous investigations were focused on Shaik and his companies.

In the event that Zuma’s trial starts only next February, this will raise the political temperatures in the ruling tripartite alliance ahead of the all-important December 2007 national conference. Zuma’s backers in the alliance maintain his is a “political trial” calculated to eliminate him from the race to succeed Mbeki as president of the ANC and later of SA.

For Zuma, scaling the corruption trial hurdle will be the first step to securing pole position in the race. But Zuma and his senior aides know from their experience with a recent rape case that an ongoing criminal trial all but disqualifies him from party processes. Zuma was all but silenced from the time he was charged with rape in December last year until his acquittal in May this year.

An ongoing corruption trial would hobble his efforts in the intense lobbying and campaigning that will precede the national conference. Complicating matters further, a critical policy conference scheduled for December was postponed by the ANC until the middle of next year. The conference would have given Zuma the opportunity to lobby the ANC’s rank and file.

With acknowledgement to Vukani Mde, Karima Brown and Business Day Weekender.