Publication: Cape Argus Issued: Date: 2008-02-28 Reporter: Karyn Maughan

Shaik will 'Never, Never' Admit Guilt

 

Publication 

Cape Argus
Date

2008-02-28
Reporter Karyn Maughan

Web Link

www.capeargus.co.za

 

Schabir Shaik's lawyers say that because the courts ruled it was so, he had "no other option" but to concede that he had bribed Jacob Zuma.

Although Shaik had to accept the rulings of the two courts that found him guilty of fraud and corruption, they stressed that Shaik had never, and would never, admit his guilt *1.

Speaking to the Cape Argus after Shaik's final legal bid to stop the state confiscating R33 million of his assets as the proceeds of crime, Shaik's attorney, Reeves Parsee, stressed that the concession that Shaik had bribed Zuma was "fact-sensitive *2" and "had only been made for the purposes of this enquiry *3".

"We have never conceded that Mr Shaik bribed Mr Zuma but Mr Shaik, as a law-abiding citizen, is obliged to accept the findings of the lower courts to the extent that the lower courts found the payments were made.

"Mr Shaik has never accepted and will never admit that he bribed Mr Zuma."

The R33m at the heart of Shaik's dispute with the Asset Forfeiture Unit is alleged to be a benefit Shaik obtained after Zuma intervened in a dispute between him and French arms company Thomson/Thint.

Asked by the court whether there was any evidence that "there had been a bribe" prior to Zuma's intervention with Thomson, Shaik's counsel, Martin Brassey SC, instantly responded: "Oh, decidedly."

Again pointing out that Zuma had not been charged or called to testify in Shaik's trial, Brassey stressed there was nothing to show that Zuma's decision was not motivated by friendship or a desire to assist his-then financial advisor.

"The question we have to ask ourselves is whether the bribes were the only reason for Mr Zuma's intervention ... we don't know what was operating in Mr Zuma's mind," Brassey said.

"It must be found that Zuma would not have intervened had he not been bribed."

Judgment has been reserved.

With acknowledgements to Karyn Maughan and Cape Argus.


*1       In that case, he should never, ever get out of prison until the entire term is served, with backpay for the period spent in the infirmary.

*2      While it is a fact that the judges made a guilty finding, the finding itself is still an opinion.

*3      Another nice concession.

While his advocate had to tell the truth to the court, otherwise both his own credibility as well as that of his current case argument would be irretrievably compromised, his client continues to lie.