While Judge Hilary Squires didn't use the phrase "generally corrupt relationship", his finding in the Schabir Shaik trial was certainly to that effect.

During the trial, the phrase "generally corrupt relationship" was used to distinguish counts one and three from each other.

In the indictment against Shaik, he was firstly charged with cultivating a relationship with Jacob Zuma by making a number of payments to him, or on his behalf, with a corrupt intention.

Count three, however, deals with what could be described as a specific corrupt relationship, where an agreement - as contained in the controversial encrypted fax - was entered into between Shaik, Zuma and the then head of the French arms company, Thint.

The purpose of this relationship was to establish an alleged means of payment for Zuma by Thint in return for his support.

Shaik was convicted of being part of the conspiracy to commit corruption.

In making his findings, Judge Squires said: "It would be flying in the face of common sense and ordinary human nature to think he did not realise the advantages to him of continuing to enjoy Zuma's goodwill to an even greater extent than before 1997; and even if nothing was ever said between them to establish the mutually beneficial symbiosis that the evidence shows exist-ed, the circumstances of the commencement and the sustained continuation thereafter of these payments can only have generated a sense of obligation in the recipient.

"If Zuma could not repay money, how else could he do so than by providing the help of his name and political office as and when it was asked, particularly in the field of government contracted work, which is what Shaik was hoping to benefit from.

"It seems an inescapable conclusion that he embarked on this never-ending series of payments when he realised the extent of Zuma's indebtedness," said Judge Squires

With acknowledgements to Estelle Ellis and Cape Argus.