Publication: Mail and Guardian Issued: Date: 2006-12-06 Reporter: Sam Sole Reporter: Sapa

State Prepares to Charge Zuma Again

 

Publication 

Mail and Guardian
Date

2006-12-06

Reporter

Sam Sole, Sapa

Web Link

www.mg.co.za

 

The state has given its strongest indication yet that it intends to recharge Jacob Zuma with corruption, the Star newspaper reported on Wednesday.

The Johannesburg daily said it had established that the National Prosecuting Authority had notified Zuma and the French arms company Thint that it would apply for certain documents -- crucial in the case against Zuma -- to be released by the Mauritian High Court, which is holding them by sealed order.

The documents are believed to include the diary of Alain Thetard, Thint's former chief executive in South Africa.

Judge Hilary Squires and the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) accepted in the trial and appeal of Durban businessman Schabir Shaik that an encrypted fax sent by Thétard to his superiors in Mauritius and Paris, contained details of the request of a bribe for Zuma.

The NPA would make the application on Tuesday in the chambers of a Durban High Court judge, the paper reported.

If the application was opposed, the matter would probably be argued next year.

Because Thétard refused to come to South Africa to give evidence, the contents of the fax became hearsay, which is only legally admissible under defined conditions. This was one area where the SCA gave the state a rough ride during argument, creating speculation that this crucial piece of evidence might be rejected. Instead, the SCA found that it was in the interests of justice for the fax to be admitted.

While the SCA found it unnecessary to decide, as Squires had done, that Zuma must have been aware of the offer of payment, the appeal judgement does conclude that Thétard’s discussions with Zuma and Shaik must have led him to firmly believe that Zuma was willing to take a bribe. This is likely to be devastating to Zuma.

“The content of the fax, being incriminating, had it fallen into the wrong hands, could have had very serious adverse consequences for Thétard, Shaik and Zuma.

“A false intimation to his [Thétard’s] superiors could also have had very serious adverse consequences for them, should they have proceeded to give effect to the requested bribe, wrongly thinking that Zuma was amenable to receiving a bribe …

“It is for this reason highly unlikely that he [Thétard] would have exposed himself, Shaik, Zuma and his superiors to these dangers had it not been necessary to do so. It is in fact almost inconceivable that he would have advised his superiors that he understood the then Deputy President to have agreed to receive a bribe if that was not his understanding of what had happened at the meeting …

“Being a sensitive matter with inherent attendant dangers and a matter that his superiors were intended to act upon, it is also likely that Thétard would have taken great care accurately to reflect his understanding of what the request by Shaik was.”

With acknowledgements to Sapa, Sam Sole and Mail & Guardian.