By Andre Grobler - Citizen Online
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
BLOEMFONTEIN - The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed on Monday Durban businessman Schabir Shaik's appeal against his fraud and corruption convictions, in a unanimous decision by a full bench of five appeal judges.
Reading a summary of the judgment and the court orders, the president of the court, Judge Craig Howie, said they had found no grounds to change Shaik's convictions and sentences, which meant a prison term of 15 years, in effect.
On the first corruption charge, involving a "generally corrupt relationship" with former deputy president Jacob Zuma, and payments of over R1.2 million made to him, the Appeal Court found that Shaik had misused his friendship with Zuma.
"At the times with which the case is concerned Mr Zuma was initially the member of the KwaZulu-Natal executive committee (MEC) for economic affairs and tourism and subsequently the deputy president of the Republic.
"The Constitution says an MEC and a cabinet member (which the deputy president is) may not do three things: (1) undertake paid work, (2) act in a way which brings his official responsibilities and private interests into conflict, or (3) use his position to enrich himself or improperly benefit another person."
The judges said it was submitted that Shaik had made 238 payments totalling over R1.2 million from October 1995 to September 2002, to the benefit of Zuma.
It was hard to believe Shaik's point that he regarded some of these as payments to the African National Congress, when their effect was to benefit Zuma.
Referring to Shaik's Nkobi group of companies, "We find that the Nkobi group's books and a number of relevant witnesses, for both prosecution and defence, show that Mr Shaik could not believably have regarded any of the payments made as payments to the ANC rather than to Mr Zuma."
The court found that in making these payments Shaik intended to influence Zuma to act "in furtherance of the business interests of Shaik and his companies... in conflict with the duties imposed upon Zuma by... the Constitution.
"Mr Zuma's efforts contributed to Mr Shaik acquiring a material interest in a highly lucrative contract to supply the armaments for the Navy's new corvettes.
"It follows that Shaik was correctly convicted on count 1 of corruption as charged," the judgment read.
The Appeal Court also found that Shaik was correctly convicted on the second charge of fraud.
This relates to amounts written off in the records of some of Shaik's companies and in audited annual financial statements.
"We also agree... with the trial court's conclusion that the auditors would not have had reason, unprompted, to contrive the write-off by themselves and that circumstantial evidence and the testimony of two other prosecution witnesses pointed to Mr Shaik's having been a party to it," Howie said.
On the third charge -- also corruption -- and the admissibility of the so-called "encrypted fax" the Appeal Court found the trial court had correctly allowed it as evidence, although on a different ground from the trial court.
The fax minutes a meeting between Shaik, Zuma and Alain Thetard of the French arms company Thomson-CSF, during which a bribe to be paid by Thomson-CSF to Zuma was agreed upon.
"Not only does the fax prove that Thetard wrote the words it contains but there is abundant surrounding evidence to find that there was proof beyond reasonable doubt that what Mr Shaik requested of Thomson was a bribe to Mr Zuma," Howie said.
The Appeal Court found that the trial court had imposed the right sentences -- 15 years on each of the corruption charges, and three years on the fraud charge, the sentence to run concurrently.
The 15-year terms were mandatory unless substantial and compelling circumstances justified less.
"Given the very high level at which the corruption in this case occurred, given corruption is inconsistent with the rule of law and the fundamental values of the Constitution, and given that corruption lowers the moral tone of a nation and negatively affects development and the promotion of human rights, we do not think any grounds have been shown to interfere with the sentences imposed," Howie said.
Shaik also brought a civil appeal, against an order to pay about R35 million -- said to be the proceeds of crime -- to the State.
The Appeal Court ruled that the confiscation order was rightly granted in two of the three amounts claimed by the State, but Shaik's appeal succeeded in regard to a sum of R499 688. - Sapa.
Shaik appeal dismissed
By Andre Grobler - Citizen Online
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
BLOEMFONTEIN - The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed on Monday Durban businessman Schabir Shaik's appeal against his fraud and corruption convictions, in a unanimous decision by a full bench of five appeal judges.
Reading a summary of the judgment and the court orders, the president of the court, Judge Craig Howie, said they had found no grounds to change Shaik's convictions and sentences, which meant a prison term of 15 years, in effect.
On the first corruption charge, involving a "generally corrupt relationship" with former deputy president Jacob Zuma, and payments of over R1.2 million made to him, the Appeal Court found that Shaik had misused his friendship with Zuma.
"At the times with which the case is concerned Mr Zuma was initially the member of the KwaZulu-Natal executive committee (MEC) for economic affairs and tourism and subsequently the deputy president of the Republic.
"The Constitution says an MEC and a cabinet member (which the deputy president is) may not do three things: (1) undertake paid work, (2) act in a way which brings his official responsibilities and private interests into conflict, or (3) use his position to enrich himself or improperly benefit another person."
The judges said it was submitted that Shaik had made 238 payments totalling over R1.2 million from October 1995 to September 2002, to the benefit of Zuma.
It was hard to believe Shaik's point that he regarded some of these as payments to the African National Congress, when their effect was to benefit Zuma.
Referring to Shaik's Nkobi group of companies, "We find that the Nkobi group's books and a number of relevant witnesses, for both prosecution and defence, show that Mr Shaik could not believably have regarded any of the payments made as payments to the ANC rather than to Mr Zuma."
The court found that in making these payments Shaik intended to influence Zuma to act "in furtherance of the business interests of Shaik and his companies... in conflict with the duties imposed upon Zuma by... the Constitution.
"Mr Zuma's efforts contributed to Mr Shaik acquiring a material interest in a highly lucrative contract to supply the armaments for the Navy's new corvettes.
"It follows that Shaik was correctly convicted on count 1 of corruption as charged," the judgment read.
The Appeal Court also found that Shaik was correctly convicted on the second charge of fraud.
This relates to amounts written off in the records of some of Shaik's companies and in audited annual financial statements.
"We also agree... with the trial court's conclusion that the auditors would not have had reason, unprompted, to contrive the write-off by themselves and that circumstantial evidence and the testimony of two other prosecution witnesses pointed to Mr Shaik's having been a party to it," Howie said.
On the third charge -- also corruption -- and the admissibility of the so-called "encrypted fax" the Appeal Court found the trial court had correctly allowed it as evidence, although on a different ground from the trial court.
The fax minutes a meeting between Shaik, Zuma and Alain Thetard of the French arms company Thomson-CSF, during which a bribe to be paid by Thomson-CSF to Zuma was agreed upon.
"Not only does the fax prove that Thetard wrote the words it contains but there is abundant surrounding evidence to find that there was proof beyond reasonable doubt that what Mr Shaik requested of Thomson was a bribe to Mr Zuma," Howie said.
The Appeal Court found that the trial court had imposed the right sentences -- 15 years on each of the corruption charges, and three years on the fraud charge, the sentence to run concurrently.
The 15-year terms were mandatory unless substantial and compelling circumstances justified less.
"Given the very high level at which the corruption in this case occurred, given corruption is inconsistent with the rule of law and the fundamental values of the Constitution, and given that corruption lowers the moral tone of a nation and negatively affects development and the promotion of human rights, we do not think any grounds have been shown to interfere with the sentences imposed," Howie said.
Shaik also brought a civil appeal, against an order to pay about R35 million -- said to be the proceeds of crime -- to the State.
The Appeal Court ruled that the confiscation order was rightly granted in two of the three amounts claimed by the State, but Shaik's appeal succeeded in regard to a sum of R499 688. - Sapa