/ 27 September 2006

Judgement in golf-estate case on Monday

Judgement is to be given on Monday in the Roodefontein corruption case, in which former Western Cape premier Peter Marais and his then-provincial minister for environment, David Malatsi, face two charges of corruption.

The Bellville Regional Court case, before magistrate Andre le Grange, stems from two alleged corrupt donations — one for R300 000 and one for R100 000 — that were given to the then-New National Party (NNP) as sweeteners to expedite provincial approval for Roodefontein golf estate near Plettenberg Bay.

The developer, Italian Count Ricardo Agusta, was three years ago fined R1-million in plea-bargain proceedings.

At Wednesday’s proceedings, defence counsel Craig Webster, for Marais, said the high point of the case was a high-level meeting in April 2002.

At this meeting representatives of the developers had complained to Marais about the many delays in the approval process, which was costing them heavily.

Webster said the charge sheet alleged that Marais had assured those at the meeting that the development would be approved.

He added: ”At that meeting, Marais merely urged the officials to make their decision, but he did not give the officials a deadline or indicate which way the decision should go.”

The cornerstone of the state’s case was the allegation that the donations were given with corrupt intent.

”The facts refute this, the donations were innocently received, with no corrupt intent.”

Webster said unlike Malatsi, who had testified for his defence, Marais had chosen not to testify, in accordance with his constitutional right to remain silent.

He said Marais’s choice to remain silent could not lead to adverse inferences against him, nor could his choice strengthen the state’s case.

Webster added: ”The court is only called upon to decide whether the state’s case constitutes proof beyond reasonable doubt — not to ponder Marais’s reasons for remaining silent.”

Webster said the R300 000 donation to the NNP was received innocently, without corrupt intent, while Marais in fact was unaware of the second donation, for R100 000, that ended up in the account of the NNP’s Khayelitsha constituency.

He said allegations of a common purpose between Marais and Malatsi concerning the Khayelitsha donation, were ”sweeping accusations”.

Webster contended that the first charge, involving the R300 000, was in any event fatally flawed as it was framed under the wrong section of the Corruption Act.

He said the case against Marais was ”speculative, and without substance”. — Sapa