Deputy President Jacob Zuma and Schabir Shaik bluffed former president Nelson Mandela to ensure that he did not withhold financial assistance to Zuma, the Durban High Court heard on Monday.
”I did not want Mr Mandela to know that Mr Zuma owed Mr Shaik money”, said Shaik, who has been charged with two counts of corruption and one of fraud, under cross-examination.
He told the court that he and Mandela had disagreed about the economic development plans of the African National Congress’s former Treasurer General Thomas Nkobi.
Nkobi’s empowerment plans was based on the Malaysian model, which Mandela and his then deputy Thabo Mbeki did not want the ANC to be associated with.
They had previously urged Shaik to continue with the plans independently.
Shaik said a ”debt-trapped” Zuma was offered assistance by Mandela and ”I did not want to put Zuma’s potential help at risk.”
While in the witness box Shaik started impersonating Mandela, saying that because of the disagreement with Mandela, he and Zuma thought it was best not to let Mandela know that Zuma owed money to Shaik.
Instead of listing Shaik as one of Zuma’s’ ”debts” they put down the name of Shaik’s’ trust, Pitszu.
Senior prosecutor Billy Downer, SC, also touched on the R2-million revolving loan agreement between Zuma and Shaik.
He wanted to know why interest was only charged from the time the agreement was drawn up in 1999 and not on the money paid to Zuma beforehand.
Shaik replied that he did not want to charge interest because it went against his religious beliefs.
He said Zuma had to register the loan he had made from Shaik in Parliament and he did not want it to appear as if it was a benefit because he was not being charged interest.
On Monday Shaik also admitted that he had lied about his qualifications in the brochure of his Nkobi Holdings.
Shaik admitted that he was not a member of an engineering board and did not have a Masters in Business Administration as stated in the brochure.
He also admitted that he did not have two degrees from the US and UK and was not a published writer as stated in his CV.
Despite intense grilling by Downer, Shaik, who is known to have a volatile temper, remained calm, attempting to answer as evasively as possible.
When asked why he had falsified his qualifications he said because of the circumstances in which he grew up, his brothers were highly qualified and he felt he had missed out. He also wanted to impress clients.
Shaik said he had no idea how much money Zuma still owed him but ”Fortunately I am blessed to have a lot of money. If he does not pay, I will not drag him to court.”
He again emphasised their friendship and during his testimony said that ”Zuma expected me to give him assistance in the form of advice or [financial] assistance.”
Shaik he had no idea what the figures calculated up to November 2004 were only for advances made to Zuma up until September 30, 2002.
Last week he said that he was still assisting Zuma.
Downer also insisted that Zuma’s two acknowledgements of debt were ”falsely calculated to mislead”.
He wanted to know why there was an acknowledgement of debt for R140 000 for money used in the course of Zuma’s ANC duties.
He said Shaik had insisted that he regarded this money as donations to the party. The trial continues. – Sapa