Publication: The Star Issued: Date: 2007-08-30 Reporter: Tania Broughton Reporter: Karyn Maughan

Now Thint's Credibility Is Under Fire

 

Publication 

The Star
Date

2007-08-30

Reporter

Tania Broughton, Karyn Maughan

Web Link

www.thestar.co.za

  

State attacks CEO for reneging on deal with the Scorpions

It was a relationship that once held such promise - but now, says the state, it can no longer trust French arms company Thint.

Addressing the Supreme Court of Appeal yesterday, counsel for the state Wim Trengove SC focused on what he described as Thint CEO Pierre Moynot's "extraordinary" statement that the Scorpions' raids on the company's office were pointless - because incriminating evidence sought by the state would have been destroyed.

"In other words, what Mr Moynot says is that one must assume that Thint and its employees will always destroy or dispose of any documents which might provide the slightest semblance of support for the state.

"It was little wonder that Scorpions investigators no longer had any faith in Thint's co-operation," Trengove said.

At issue at three hearings in the Bloemfontein court this week are the controversial 2005 raids on the homes and offices of Jacob Zuma, his attorneys and Thint.

Yesterday it was Thint's turn to challenge the validity of the warrants used to search its office. And its credibility came under fire.

Trengove pointed out that former Thint representative Alain Thetard had on three occasions resisted bids by the state to locate his 2000 diary.

He also reneged on a deal with the state that, in return for criminal charges being withdrawn, he would admit to being the author of an incriminating document in the trial of Zuma's former financial adviser, Schabir Shaik.

The state has also taken issue with Thint's argument that the warrants used to search its premises were unlawful because they were obtained from Pretoria Judge President Bernard Ngoepe without his being fully aware of all the relevant facts surrounding the Scorpions' investigation into the company.

One of these points, Thint counsel Peter Hodes SC claimed, was that privileged legal documents might have been housed at the Thint premises.

This might have required the judge to include certain safeguards in the warrants.

Trengove accused Thint of deliberately not examining the documents seized "to avoid the risk of finding that they did not include any privileged material at all".

He added that the raid had been conducted under the watchful eye of Thint's legal representatives.

Judgment was reserved.

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


These weavils were never to be trusted.

Except for a short time by two asses, the then National Director of Public Prosecutions and the then Minister of Justice.

What fools.

If it wasn't for this foolishness, all the accused would long since have been languishing in a infirmaries of their choice and even their lame appeals to the Supreme Court of Appeal discarded.

And the French company would have been blacklisted from ever abusing our tax again (or for at least 30 years).