The Supreme Court of Appeal on Friday reserved judgment until January 12 in the National Prosecuting Authority's appeal against a high court ruling which effectively halted the prosecution of ANC president Jacob Zuma.

Deputy Judge President Louis Harms said the expectation was that judgment would be delivered on January 12. If there was a delay, a notice would be issued.

Earlier in the day, advocate Kemp J Kemp, for Zuma, received a grilling from the five judges hearing the appeal over Zuma's claim that he should have been allowed to make representations before being charged.

Kemp argued that apart from it being provided for in legislation, Zuma was entitled to a legitimate expectation of representation because of a "cumulative effect" of the events which had transpired since the allegations against him arose.

Judge Mandisa Maya asked Kemp to explain Zuma's legitimate expectation simply, but Kemp said he could not.

Judge Azar Cachalia said: "In fact what you want them to do is disclose all their evidence and in fact what you wanted to do was conduct the trial through representation."

The NPA is seeking to have Judge Chris Nicholson's September 12 judgement overturned on appeal.

Nicholson ruled that the NPA's decision to charge Zuma was unlawful because he had not been allowed make representations to the National Director of Public Prosecutions before he was charged.

Zuma has also claimed that the NDPP's decision to charge him should have been reviewed.

He said that the legislation provided "an opportunity to look at the decision in the light of what went before" and that "striking the matter from the roll terminates the charges, but it does not terminate the decision (to charge)".

In September 2006, Judge Herbert Msimang struck the State's case from the roll after the NPA sought a postponement.

The State had maintained that the decision in December last year to charge Zuma was a new decision and not a review of a previous decision.

Zuma's legal team has claimed that the NDPP's decision to prosecute last year constituted a reversal of Ngcuka's 2003 decision.

Earlier, it emerged that Nicholson may have effectively found former justice ministers Penuell Maduna and Brigitte Mabandla guilty of political interference, despite the fact that there were no allegations made against them by Zuma.

Questioned by Harms as to whether Zuma had specifically named the two ministers in his allegations of political interference, Kemp conceded that neither had been named.

"And the judge finds that they are guilty of a crime?" asked Harms.

In his September 12, judgment Nicholson found that both Maduna and Mabandla had behaved badly.

"Put at its very lowest, Mr Maduna seems to have played a not insignificant part in the planning of the strategy in question, whatever its end objective might be," Nicholson found.

Nicholson said former NPA boss Bulelani Ngcuka's praise of Maduna at the press conference where Ngcuka announced his resignation was noteworthy.

He said the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions had been set up constitutionally to act without interference from politicians, but that Ngcuka's praise of Maduna's leadership was a clear sign that this was not the case.

Marumo Moerane, appearing for former president Thabo Mbeki, argued that Nicholson's findings of political interference "violated his constitutional rights as president as well as an ordinary person".

Mbeki wants to challenge Nicholson's finding of political interference, which he claims led the ANC to recall him from his position as president of the country.

NPA advocate Wim Trengove asked the court to find that references to political interference in decisions to prosecuting Zuma be ignored as they were irrelevant to the matter before the court.

"As a matter of law they are irrelevant, they should not have been made."

Trengove asked the court to let the matter rest for now, but indicated that the issue might come relevant in possible future litigation such as when Zuma might ask the courts for a permanent stay of prosecution.

"This very issue could be one of the centre pieces of the issues to come."

Trengove said although the comments had serious implications in terms of misconduct of NPA bosses which should lead to steps such as "internal investigations" into the apparent conduct, they should be struck out.

He said even if they suggested criminal conduct on the side of Mbeki and contraventions of the NPA Act, the allegations should be struck out or simply be ignored.

Trengove said the presiding judge in the high court made the findings of political interference without parties making any presentations on the matter.

"We submit that the lordship (Nicholson) was quite wrong (in making the comments)," Trengove said.

He said the SCA should "simply" acknowledge that the allegation were of a most serious nature but rule that they were irrelevant to the matter before the court.

With acknowledgements to Andre Grobler, Giordano Stolley and Sapa.