Publication: Mail and Guardian Issued: Date: 2006-08-28 Reporter: Sapa Reporter:

Defence : Zuma would have been Exonerated at Shaik Trial

 

Publication 

Mail and Guardian
Date

2006-08-28

Reporter

 Sapa

Web Link

www.mg.co.za

 

Jacob Zuma would have been "exonerated" had he been charged alongside his financial adviser Schabir Shaik, Zuma's defence team claimed in its heads of argument filed in the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Monday.

Had they been able to do so, they would have cross-examined Shaik to prove he "simply conned the French concerns out of R500 000 in a simple fraud to enrich himself".

The fact that Shaik could not be cross-examined during his corruption trial *1 has prejudiced Zuma's right to a fair trial.

"The possibility of a fraud by Shaik [and perhaps by Thetard as well] is so obvious *2, and the circumstances point so clearly to this being the true explanation *3, that it would present a golden opportunity to demonstrate Zuma's innocence by targeting Shaik in cross-examination."

Alain Thetard was the former executive of Thint (then known as Thomson-CSF), the South African subsidiary of the French arms manufacturing giant Thales.

In the heads of argument, also signed by Kemp J Kemp, Zuma's defence team said the only remedy for Zuma is a permanent stay of prosecution because of the delay in bringing the charges against him.

It is also claimed that Zuma's pre-trial and trial rights had been infringed. They claim the delay in prosecuting Zuma is a deliberate act by the state.

The former deputy president is scheduled to appear in court again on September 5.

With acknowledgement to Sapa and Mail & Guardian.

*1       Why cannot Shaik be cross-examined during his corruption trial still to be heard?


*2      If the author of these heads of argument truly believes this poppycock then Lewis Carroll should be the next director of Zone Reality