Supporters out in force as defence hangs hopes on having case dismissed

Delays caused by the defence were ‘entirely outside the control of the state’

ANC deputy president Jacob Zuma may be a free man by the end of next week if his defence team succeeds in its impending bid to have the corruption and fraud charges against him dismissed when the case resumes tomorrow.

With only hours to go before the case is heard in the Pietermaritzburg High Court, Zuma’s backers have thrown all their energies into orchestrating a demonstration of support for him, as well as taking to the streets in a bid to force the prosecution to drop the charges.

On Friday about 1000 Cosatu members marched in Durban to make this demand, while the Congress of South African Students has threatened a class boycott if the case is adjourned. This may, however, cause problems for Zuma’s backers and ANC Youth League leaders are already distancing themselves from the Cosas threat, despite being responsible for the mobilisation which has caused the Cosas move.

Yesterday Zuma attended the burial of Nadeco leader Sipho Mlaba outside Mpumalanga, Hammarsdale, and a maskanda concert at Durban’s Kingsmead Stadium to raise funds for his defence. This is a critical task: the Friends of Jacob Zuma Trust has fallen short of its R12-million target, with insiders pegging the figure raised at less that R1-million.

Today Zuma is the main ANC speaker at the SACP’s 85th anniversary rally at Edendale in Pietermaritzburg. This, say Zuma aides, will be the platform for his last public statement before the trial commences.

Zuma’s legal team and that of his co-accused, French arms dealer Thint, are set to make applications opposing the postponement requested by the prosecution. Thint’s lawyers are also set to ask Judge Qed’usizi Herbert Msimang to withdraw the case against their clients.

They will do so on the basis that the state has created unreasonable delays in the process of drawing up an indictment against Zuma and Thint in an attempt to buy time to finalise investigations which the defence claims are based on flimsy evidence. However, they will only succeed in this strategy if they can convince Judge Msimang that the delays are in fact the result of the prosecution’s delaying tactics.

The prosecution in turn will argue that these delays have in fact been caused by the defence, who chose to go to outside the courts to challenge last August’s raids on the homes of Zuma and his associates.

Prosecutors had attempted to strike a deal with the defence in which the admissibility of all evidence seized in the raids on Zuma’s home and offices, those of his lawyers, Juleika Mohamed and Michael Hulley, and Thint, would be argued when the case resumed on Monday.

Instead, Zuma’s lawyers successfully challenged the validity of some of the 22 search warrants authorising the raids at the High Court, but the prosecution then instituted a series of appeals and negotiations with defence attorneys, which are still pending.

In an affidavit filed in court last week, lead Scorpions investigator Johan du Plooy said the delays caused by the defence were “entirely outside the control of the state”.

“While it is of course the accused’s right to challenge the legality of the searches ... this was not the only remedy available to them,” he said.

This strategy by the defence, Du Plooy said, had delayed the writing of the forensic auditors’ report and had also resulted in documents remaining sealed, preventing the prosecution from analysing them.

Du Plooy added that the state had warned the defence that the applications relating to the searches would delay the case.

On Friday Ajay Sooklal, Thint’s lawyer, confirmed he would be making the application opposing an adjournment and for withdrawal tomorrow.

Michael Hulley, Zuma’s attorney, had earlier indicated that his application would be made before Friday, but it will only be done tomorrow.

As a result, Msimang is likely to adjourn the case tomorrow once the two defence teams have submitted their applications in order to give the prosecution time to respond. The case is likely to resume on Tuesday, when all three applications will be argued. A further adjournment, possibly to Thursday or Friday, is also likely to give Msimang time to consider all arguments before giving a ruling on what is effectively a trial within a trial.

If he accepts the defence application, Zuma’s team is set to join Thint’s with an application for the case to be withdrawn as the state will not be in a position to proceed.

Should Msimang reject the defence applications, then the matter will be adjourned at least until next month as the prosecution team will be at the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein from August 21 to August 25 for the appeal by Schabir Shaik, Zuma’s former financial adviser, against his corruption conviction and 15- year jail sentence.

Shaik’s appeal is also central to Zuma’s prosecution: Zuma was charged after Judge Hilary Squires convicted Shaik of conducting a “generally corrupt relationship” with Zuma. Further, Shaik’s appeal challenges the validity of the encrypted fax between him and Thint soliciting a bribe of R1-million for Zuma and the state’s approach of charging him for past and present acts of corruption.

With acknowledgement to Paddy Harper and Sunday Times.