The case against former deputy president Jacob Zuma should be struck from the roll and charges brought against him only when the State had its "house in order", his advocate told the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Tuesday.

Kemp J Kemp, for Zuma, accused the State of not complying with its constitutional obligation to provide a final indictment.

He said the present indictment that had been supplied to him was "not even worth the paper it's written on."

Zuma and his co-accused Thint, subsidiary of a French arms company, are asking that the court dismiss the trial because the case has been prejudiced by unreasonable delays caused by the State.

This was evident in the manpower problem the prosecution was having in the appeal of Zuma's former financial adviser Schabir Shaik against his conviction and sentencing to 15 years for fraud and corruption.

Zuma is accused of having accepted a R500,000 a year bribe from Thint in exchange for protection into a probe into South Africa's controversial multi-billion rand arms deal.

Advocate Wim Trengove, for the State, earlier told the court the State would be ready to go to trial on October 15 when it would submit a finalised indictment for Zuma and his two co-accused. "As far as the state is concerned it will be ready to go to trial whenever the court decides and when the defence is ready," Trengove said.

Raising the issue of Shaik's appeal -- who was found to have had a generally corrupt relationship with Zuma -- Kemp asked how the State could say it would be ready to present a final indictment if that case had not been finalised.

The State has suggested a postponement until early next year to give Zuma and Thint's defence time to study the 500-page KPMG forensic audit and prepare their case.

Kemp said if the State was serious and honest, the case should be adjourned until 2008. He added that Zuma should never have been charged.

Earlier, Trengove invited Zuma's legal team to submit evidence taken in controversial search and seizure raids to be adjudicated by Judge Herbert Msimang, saying this would speed up the corruption trial and avoid duplication of procedures.

"In the interests of a speedy resolution the trial court will be in a better position to consider the admissibility of the evidence (seized in the raids)," Trengove said.

The State said on Tuesday that the status of challenges to the various search and seizure raids conducted in the run-up to the trial were the main reason a postponement was needed.

He said while the State did not contest the defence's right to contest the raids, the defence should not be surprised if this led to delays.

"If they exercise their right to litigate (regarding the search and seizure raids) then they (Zuma's defence) can't complain about delays in this case".

He said that the State would go ahead with the trial irrespective of whether the raids were contested.

Referring to a seized computer hard-drive containing four million images, Kemp asked which one of the documents on the hard drive would be relevant to the case so the defence could prepare its case.

  The case continues on Wednesday

With acknowledgement to Sapa.