An application by African National Congress president Jacob Zuma to be involved in a case involving documents that could be used as evidence against him by the National Prosecuting Authority has been rejected by the Mauritius Supreme Court.
An official in the office of the Mauritius attorney general confirmed that the Mauritius Supreme Court had rejected Zuma’s application.
She said the court’s decision had been faxed to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), but could not provide further details as the chief attorney was not in the office.
Attempts to reach Zuma’s lawyer Michael Hulley were unsuccessful.
Zuma is seeking to obtain the originals of 13 documents used to convict Schabir Shaik, his former financial adviser. French arms manufacturer Thales International is fighting to prevent the documents from leaving Mauritius.
The 13 documents held in Mauritius include the 2000 diary of former Thint chief executive Alain Thetard which details a meeting between him, Zuma and convicted businessman Schabir Shaik.
At the meeting, a R500 000-a-year bribe was allegedly discussed.
Copies of these documents were accepted as evidence in the trial that ended with Shaik being convicted and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for corruption and fraud by Judge Hilary Squires in 2005.
Zuma faces 16 charges — one count of racketeering, two counts of corruption, one count of money laundering and 12 counts of fraud.
The South African subsidiaries of Thales International (formerly Thomson-CFS) — Thint Holding (Southern Africa) and Thint — each face a charge of racketeering, and two counts of corruption.
Call for case to be dropped
Lawyers for Zuma filed papers at the Pietermaritzburg High Court on June 23 arguing that his corruption trial should be dropped.
Hulley said the NPA has been sent copies of the document and that the matter is expected to be heard in the Pietermaritzburg court on August 4 and 5. This will be ahead of the start of his corruption trial on August 14.
Zuma is seeking an order declaring that the NPA’s decision to prosecute him is invalid and should be set aside.
”Should the present application not result in a positive outcome in respect of a re-appraisal of the decision to prosecute, a permanent stay application will be brought in which these issues and the impact on my fair-trial rights will be addressed in detail,” said the document. – Sapa