Judge Phillip Levensohn on Monday granted the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) request for a letter asking Mauritian authorities to hand over documents pertaining to alleged meetings between ANC deputy president Jacob Zuma, convicted businessman Schabir Shaik and French arms manufacturer Thint.

The decision was handed down in the Durban High Court.

The documents, allegedly about meetings related to the controversial arms deal, include the 2000 diary of Alain Thetard, the former chief executive of Thales International's South African subsidiary Thint (Pty) Ltd.

In his judgment, Levensohn rejected Zuma and Thint's assertion that legal proceedings against them were still pending *1 and the NPA was still bound by a March 2006 order issued by Judge Pete Combrinck that any letter of request would have to be granted by a trial judge.

During the two days of argument in March, both Zuma's advocate Kemp J Kemp and Thint advocate Nirmal Singh had said that because the NPA refused to withdraw its case against Zuma and Thint, Combrinck's order was still valid.

In September, Judge Herbert Msimang struck the case against Zuma and Thint from the roll, after the State had sought a postponement pending the outcome of Shaik's appeal against his fraud and corruption conviction, and a challenge to the search and seizure raids carried out on Zuma, his attorneys and Thint.

"I reject this submission," said Levensohn *1.

"In my view when a case is struck off the roll prior to plea the criminal proceedings pending are terminated."

Levensohn also rejected Thint and Zuma's assertion that the State was not seeking the information for use in an investigation *2 as described in terms of the International Co-operation in Criminal Matters Act.

The defence had asserted that the original request to Mauritius for the documents in 2001 was "legally flawed".

Levensohn said: "In my judgment this is a matter which should be ventilated in Mauritius before its high court. There would be much to be said for the view that the attack on the search and seizure of 2001 comes very belatedly *3."

The court heard during argument in March that Thint's parent company, Thales International, had obtained an injunction in Mauritius against the documents being release out of fear that information not relevant to Zuma's case would be released *4.

"At this stage there appears to be sufficient prima facie evidence that the 2001 request was properly made and the process a lawful one *5," said Levensohn.

He also rejected Zuma and Thint's allegation that the State did "not have clean hands" *6 when it took copies of the documents during the search and seizure raids in Mauritius in 2001.

He said that during Shaik's trial in 2005, Judge Hilary Squires had accepted the copies as evidence and that therefore "there had been no impropriety" when copies of the documents were made.

Argument that the injunction in Mauritius prevented Levensohn from issuing the letter of request was also rejected.

Levensohn's decision follows the granting of a court order in the Pretoria High Court last week allowing the National Director of Public Prosecutions to extend its inquiries to British banks and lawyers in its investigation against Zuma and Thint.

With acknowledgement to Sapa.

It's a small case, but a big hit.

The score :