Thint aims for permanent stay of prosecution

Pierre Moynot, the executive of the French arms manufacturer charged alongside Jacob Zuma for corruption, may have incriminated himself when he testified in the Schabir Shaik trial.

The defence team for French arms dealer Thint—which Moynot represents—said that when Moynot testified in the Shaik trial “he [was] not warned by the state that the questions he will be asked may incriminate him”.

This was included in heads of argument submitted to the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Monday, aimed at getting a permanent stay of prosecution.

Moynot is the representative of the two Thint (formerly Thomson-CSF) companies, which are South African subsidiaries of French arms dealer Thales.

Thint (Pty) Ltd was charged in the case against Shaik. Charges were, however, withdrawn after a deal was hatched between the National Prosecuting Authority and Thales to get Moynot’s predecessor Alain Thetard to provide an affidavit admitting he was the author of the “encrypted fax”.

The fax detailed a meeting at which Shaik allegedly negotiated a R500 000 a year bribe for Zuma from Thomson-CSF.

This was allegedly in exchange for protection during investigations into alleged irregularities in South Africa’s multibillion-rand arms deal.

The state contends that Thint violated the agreement when Thetard submitted a second affidavit, and that the agreement had never precluded Thint from ever being prosecuted.

However, Thint’s defence team stated in the heads of argument that “the Thales Group would not have been interested in a provisional withdrawal of the charges, because the allegation made against accused number three [Thint (Pty) Ltd] was damaging its reputation and its business, and if anything it would have wanted the withdrawal of the charges to be the end of the prosecution”.

Described as “the battle plan”, heads of argument are prepared by legal teams to set out their arguments in a clear and convincing way.

Heads of argument generally indicate the name and number of the case, a description of the parties, the background facts, the legal questions that arise, the applicable law and a conclusion.

The state is expected to file its heads of argument on Thursday. The former deputy president is scheduled to appear in court again on September 5.—Sapa