Judgement in Durban businessman Schabir Shaik’s appeal hearings will be delivered next Monday, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) has announced.
”Only the order will be read by the president of the court, Judge [Craig] Howie, and not the judgement itself,” Henry Snyman, an SCA spokesperson, said on Tuesday.
The judgement would be read in court one at 9.45am.
The National Prosecuting Authority has been officially informed that judgement will be given on Monday.
Snyman said television cameras would be allowed into the court for the occasion.
The SCA reserved judgement on September 26 in the criminal appeals of Shaik against his convictions for corruption and fraud. The next day, the court reserved judgement in a civil appeal against an asset-forfeiture order of about R34-million.
Shaik was convicted in July last year by the Durban High Court of corruption and fraud. Judge Hilary Squires sentenced him to 15 years in prison on each of two corruption counts, and another three years for fraud. The sentences were to run concurrently.
Squires granted Shaik leave to appeal to the SCA against one of two corruption convictions and one of fraud, albeit on limited grounds.
Squires refused leave to appeal against his conviction on the first corruption charge, which involved a ”generally corrupt relationship” with former deputy president Jacob Zuma and payments exceeding R1,2-million made to him.
After Shaik approached the SCA, that court ruled that leave to appeal on the first corruption charge must be argued. If the court considers it successful, Shaik could then argue the merits of the appeal itself.
During the September appeal hearings the SCA heard that Shaik did not ”cold bloodedly” set out to enter a corrupt relationship with Zuma.
Jeremy Gauntlett SC submitted on Shaik’s behalf that he and Zuma had a strong, long-standing relationship prior to any alleged corrupt activities.
Gauntlett also submitted that the Durban High Court had not followed the correct approach in interpreting their relationship.
In the state’s submission, prosecutor Billy Downer voiced scepticism at Shaik’s relationship with Zuma, and said that it was ”suspect” and ”calculated to gain benefit”.
He contented that this was ”classic” corruption, whereby people were paid retainers.
Arguing the second corruption charge — involving the admissibility of an encrypted fax — Downer told the court the bribe involved was ”just a continuation of a scheme of bribery” described in count one.
The fax details a meeting at which Shaik allegedly negotiated a R500 000-a-year bribe for Zuma with Alain Thetard of the French arms company then known as Thomson-CSF, in return for Zuma’s protection in a probe into South Africa’s multibillion-rand arms deal.
The defence claimed its case was prejudiced by the admission of the fax, as Thetard had offered to give evidence, but was never called to the stand for cross examination.
If Shaik wins the appeal on the second (fraud) and third (corruption) counts, and leave to appeal the first is denied, he will spend time in prison. — Sapa