If Judge Hilary Squires rejects his request to be allowed to take the matter on appeal, indications are the state will apply for his bail to be revoked, notwithstanding that Shaik is certain to lodge an urgent petition with the Supreme Court of Appeal to grant him the opportunity to appeal his conviction and sentence. Judge Squires this week gave few clues as to his attitude to granting the appeal.
On Tuesday the state urged the court to ignore the fact that the case was high profile and controversial. Senior state advocate Billy Downer noted that the legal test for granting leave to appeal was that there should be a ”reasonable prospect” that another court might come to a different decision. Quoting from Judge Squires’s own judgement, he argued that the evidence against Shaik was so overwhelming that there was very little chance of success on appeal and therefore the application should be rejected.
Shaik’s counsel, François van Zyl, SC, argued that the court had not given enough weight to the friendship between Shaik and former deputy president Jacob Zuma, and the possibility that it was this, rather than an intention to corrupt, that had motivated Shaik’s payments to Zuma. He also argued that it was not an offence for someone to be paid to use their political influence to benefit the payer as opposed to using their official powers to do so.
Van Zyl also repeated his attack on the admissibility of documents that were key factors in Shaik’s conviction and argued that another court might rule them inadmissible.