Publication: Cape Times Issued: Date: 2008-02-22 Reporter: Tania Broughton

Thint Says Documents can't be Surrendered as Case against Zuma is a 'Political' Ruse

 

Publication 

Cape Times
Date

2008-02-22
Reporter Tania Broughton

Web Link

 www.capetimes.co.za

 

Durban: French arms company Thint, accused of arranging payments for ANC president Jacob Zuma, is using a political conspiracy argument in its attempts to stop the state from getting its hands on documents from Mauritius.

The state wants to use the 13 documents, held under court injunction in Mauritius, in prosecuting Zuma and Thint on charges of corruption, racketeering fraud and money-laundering later this year.

This week, Zuma filed an application with the Mauritian Supreme Court that seeks to intervene in a bid by South African prosecutors to lift the injunction on the documents, seized from Thint's offices on the island in October 2001.

Because the documents are not his, Zuma has no clear legal basis on which to challenge their release.

The Scorpions have submitted a judicial letter of request to the Mauritian authorities under the Mutual Assistance in Criminal and Related Matters Act.

Zuma appears to be relying on a section of the act that essentially precludes the release of evidence for prosecution of political crimes *1.

In his court papers, he claims President Thabo Mbeki and suspended prosecutions head Vusi Pikoli have been behind "a carefully orchestrated, politically inspired and driven strategy" to exclude him from any meaningful political role.

Thint and the State have filed affidavits in the main matter.

With the French company adopting a similar line of attack as Zuma, the State's response is an indication of how it intends answering Zuma's allegations, if the Mauritian judge considering the issue calls on it to do so.

In an affidavit, Thint Holdings chief executive officer Pierre Moynot says Zuma is the "leading contender to be the next president of South Africa" and has a "large number of active opponents in South Africa and attracts numerous allegations".

Henri Boucharlat, chair of parent company Thales International Africa, said the release of the documents would be "contrary to the act" as it related to a prosecution that would be "politically motivated".

In support of his argument, he referred to an article in London's The Times of Saturday that suggested "there is a political undercurrent running through the (Zuma) case".

In its legal battles in South Africa, Thint has not relied on a political conspiracy argument before.

Investigating officer Isak du Plooy says this "scurrilous allegation" was made by Zuma in court papers in South Africa, but abandoned and taken no further by his lawyers.

There is also no mention of political conspiracies in his appeal documents before the Constitutional Court.

"This is nothing more than a rumour perpetrated by Zuma and his supporters," Du Plooy says in his answering affidavit.

"That credible evidence exists which justifies an investigation is incontrovertibly proved by the fact that their coconspirators, (Zuma's former financial adviser Schabir) Shaik and his companies, have been convicted and these convictions upheld by the highest courts in our land."

Thint, in its affidavit, alleged that the seized documents were unlawfully copied and used during Shaik's trial, proving that "authorities in South Africa show no respect for judges in Mauritius and orders made by them".

Du Plooy says this is not true. He says copies were made before the injunction was granted and the copies were used at Shaik's trial with the blessing of his lawyers.

He also disputes Thint's allegations that the State was reneging on a deal, reached at the time of Shaik's prosecution, that charges against the company would be withdrawn in return for its co-operation.

Du Plooy said that, as was agreed at the time, Alain Thetard, then-chief executive officer of Thint, had deposed an affidavit and the charges had been withdrawn *2.

"But Thetard then deposed a second, unsolicited affidavit that essentially discredited the first ... the NPA took the view that he had in effect repudiated the agreement ... and negotiations for indemnity from prosecution were terminated."

Among the documents the State wants is a 2000 diary entry by Thetard alleged to note a meeting between himself, Zuma and Shaik.

It was at this meeting, the State alleges, that it was agreed that R500 000 a year be paid to Zuma in return for protection during the probe into the multibillion-rand arms deal.

With acknowledgement to Tania Broughton and Cape Times.


*1       Clutching at straws at South African taxpayers' expense.


*2      Genuinely one of the most idiotic agreements made in the history of humans walking vertically upon this earth.

Unless of course it was made by Bulelani Ngcuka on behalf of Thabo Mbeki who had been secretly dealing with Thomson-CSF.

Both of them were clearly terrified of "the person in the ANC *3  might open their big mouth and expose them all".


*3      Quite possibly this is Barbara Masekela who arranged some of these secret dealings between Thabo Mbeki and Thomson-CSF, but only opened her mouth a little *4 in the last month.


*4      Partly lying as is to be expected in order to try to protect herself.