Publication: Cape Times Issued: Date: 2006-11-16 Reporter: Wendy Jasson da Costa Reporter:

Judge Blames Press For Furore over Shaik Case

 

Publication 

Cape Times
Date

2006-11-16

Reporter

Wendy Jasson da Costa

Web Link

www.capetimes.co.za

 

KwaZulu-Natal Judge President Vuka Tshabalala yesterday laid the blame for the furore which erupted over the Schabir Shaik fraud and corruption case squarely at the feet of the media.

"Everyone must blame you people. You caused all the confusion," he said but added it was all essentially a "storm in a tea cup" and was not prejudicial to the judiciary.

The judge was replying to Judge Hilary Squires's denial that he had used the term "generally corrupt relationship" to describe the connection between former Deputy President Jacob Zuma and Shaik.

Last week, the Supreme Court of Appeal also incorrectly attributed the statement to Squires, prompting calls by Zuma supporters for the resignation of the five judges.

The SCA issued a statement, saying that the misattribution did not occur in its judgment in the criminal appeal, but only in the introduction to the court's subsidiary civil judgment on the forfeiture of Shaik's assets.

The SCA said that it had made its own independent findings which were based on an exhaustive review of the evidence and record of the trial court.

Judge Tshabalala said yesterday: "It's water under the bridge, it's done, the SCA explained themselves .... It's not something that is prejudicial to the judiciary. The public must accept it."

Squires, the trial court judge in the case, opened a can of worms at the weekend when a letter he wrote to a Business Day journalist was published.

Judge Tshabalala confirmed he had spoken to both Squires and Justice Minister Brigitte Mabandla about the "famous phrase" which caused all the fuss. He told the minister, "It's like a storm in a teacup."

He said although it was "a very appropriate phraseology coined by the press", it was incorrect because Zuma was not in the dock *1.

"You are lumping it together saying they are guilty, (while) Squires was very careful in phrasing his judgment *2."

With acknowledgement to Wendy Jasson da Costa and Cape Times.


*1       The Two Jackasses are actually to blame for this storm in a thimble because all four of Shaik, Zuma and the Two Thints should have been simultaneously in the dock.

By now both Shaik and Zuma would be starting new beginnings and the Two Thints would have been disbarred from doing business in the country for the next fifteen years. The State would be the legal owner of 80% of the equity of African Defence Systems (Pty) Ltd. An auction would be in the planning.


*2      This is the bottom line - he was very careful in choosing the wording of his judgment and then the media went and used some wording that the prosecution had used and that he specifically wished to avoid.

But I get back to those Two Jackasses......

By the way, what was the name of that senior counsel who advised the Two Jackasses that the NPA's chances of getting a conviction against Shaik's co-conspirator were no high enough?