Publication: The Star Issued: Date: 2007-05-24 Reporter: Karyn Maughan Reporter: Tania Broughton

Declare a Mistrial, Shaik's Advocate Urges Top Court

 

Publication 

The Star
Date

2007-05-24

Reporter

 Karyn Maughan, Tania Broughton

Web Link

www.thestar.co.za

 

Schabir Shaik believes he was the state's "dry run" for its thwarted prosecution of Jacob Zuma.

And the convicted fraudster, who wants the lengthy fraud and corruption case against him declared a mistrial, believes he will get a fair trial only if he shares the dock with the ANC deputy president *1.

In an often emotive argument before the Constitutional Court yesterday, Shaik's new counsel, Martin Brassey, told the 10 judges:
"None of you will leave the bench today with any sense other than that what happened to Shaik was unfair. *2 And if it is actionable, this court must intervene."
 
Shaik's legal team are seeking the right to challenge his convictions and effective 15-year jail term for fraud and corruption connected to his relationship with Zuma, with whom he maintains he had a close friendship.

Brassey suggested that should Zuma have been tried with Shaik, the true nature of the men's relationship could have been exposed by Zuma's testimony and "the resulting judgment would have taken a different shape".

"Can you imagine if Mr Zuma had been tried alongside Shaik … Can you imagine the quality of the trial and how different it would have been if Mr Zuma, the deputy president of the country, had entered the box and said 'I want to tell how it is between me and Shaik.

" 'Shaik is a friend of mine. You are asking me to tell you that Shaik tried to influence me in the execution of my decision-making powers. I want to tell you that he helped me, he helped me comrade to comrade, he helped me in the way that a father helps a son (so far as finances are concerned).' "

Brassey paused dramatically before raising his voice.

"(Maybe Zuma would say): 'Leaving aside the encrypted fax, point to one aspect where it can be said I didn't simply take the benefits or the gifts to support myself'."

The state's failure to charge Shaik with Zuma and French arms company Thint forms the basis of Shaik's argument that he did not receive a fair trial.

Brassey said that was a "material irregularity" that could have serious repercussions for the administration of justice.

His efforts to demonstrate that Shaik suffered an unfair trial because of the National Prosecuting Authority's decision not to charge Zuma and Thint face a number of obstacles *3.

One of the most significant will be convincing the Constitutional Court to admit the entire record of the state's thwarted prosecution of Zuma into evidence.

The state was today due to begin arguing against Shaik's application.

With acknowledgements to Karyn Maughan, Tania Broughton and The Star.


*1       This will be fair only to The People.


*2      What absolute twaddle.


*3      Putting it mildly.