[ad_1]
Former President Jacob Zuma and Christine Guerrier of the Thales arms company (Photo: Felix Dlangamandla)
- Review judgment on a French Arms Company Thales application related to the Jacob Zuma corruption trial has been reserved.
- Thales defender Barry Roux argued that there was no evidence that they had knowledge of Schabir Shaik bribes to Zuma.
- It is unclear when the judgment will be rendered.
On Monday, the Pietermaritzburg High Court reserved the ruling on the request for review of the organized crime charges against the French arms company Thales.
Appearing before Justices Mahen Chetty, Anton Van Zyl and AJ Bezuidenhout, and representing Thales, attorney Barry Roux said the arms company distanced itself from the racketeering charges facing former President Jacob Zuma.
He said the state had been wrong in its decision to indict Thales for the 783 alleged corrupt payments that Shaik made to Zuma.
Roux argued that there was no evidence that Thales had knowledge of the alleged bribes. He said that the prosecution and the national director of public prosecutions did not properly examine the entire file.
He said Thales was responsible for payments made to Zuma that they were not a part of.
“They have to do it or participate in it. Real participation is required. When you look at the state application,[ly] said there was [not] enough to trust the knowledge of bribes. Even if there was awareness, they never entertained the idea that it must be participation.
“Bribery or money laundering must be through a company, it must be done consciously.”
READ | Thales’ legal challenge will effectively be ‘proof’ of the trial of Zuma, the French arms company
Roux also addressed a state-commissioned forensic report that was part of Shaik’s criminal trial.
Shaik is currently a free man, but was convicted of two counts of corruption and one count of fraud on June 2, 2005 and Judge Hilary Squires declared in her 165-page verdict that there was “overwhelming” evidence of a corrupt relationship. between Shaik and Zuma.
Shaik served two years and four months in prison before being released on medical parole in 2009.
Roux stated that there was no direct evidence linking Thales to Zuma.
“Nowhere will you find any reference to any evidence or even a presentation by the forensic expert on behalf of the State that Thales was aware of these payments.
“Nowhere in Shaik’s or the Supreme Court of Appeals’ presentation will you find that Thales was aware of the payments and they are dealing with the same matter. We want a witness, statement or document. We are still waiting.”
READ ALSO | ‘Ax Zuma and Magashule’: Call to Action on Those Considered to be Undermining Ramaphosa’s Leadership
State attorney Wim Trengrove maintained his consistent argument that they did not rely on direct evidence, but relied on circumstantial evidence.
He said it was not a mere conscience of bribery.
“It is not mere conscience, they were aware of the advance payments, then they joined. They did two things, they agreed to pay money to bribe Zuma and thwart the investigation into his own corruption. That makes them complicit after the fact. “
Trengrove added that the purchase of a “rolling advance” demonstrated its involvement.
“That made them accomplices for a common purpose. It is participation in the attempt to hide bribes paid in the past.”
He said the alleged money laundering did not take place immediately.
“It took a long time to get the French to pay the money. It happened almost a year later.”
He said the funds were concealed as “clean money,” but that the moment it was paid to Zuma, it became a bribe.
“The moment you pay it, it becomes the proceeds of crime. It became dirty money when it was used for bribery.”
Do you want to know more about this topic? Sign up to receive one of 33 News24 newsletters to receive the information you want in your inbox. Special newsletters are available to subscribers.
