SHAIK TO SINK ZUMA
‘JZ must answer to the nation’
SCHABIR Shaik was questioned by the Hawks before the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) announced on Friday that it would reinstate corruption charges against former president Jacob Zuma over the arms deal.
Zuma’s former financial adviser said he could not elaborate for fear of jeopardising investigations.
“Yes, I can confirm I was approached by the Hawks. They submitted a list of 10 questions relating to my previous dealings with the former president.
“I can only say that I have to respond truthfully, and five of those questions are quite damning against Zuma, given what I know.
“I previously stated I would testify if called on to do so and that position still stands. I have now been requested formally, which I could not refuse.
“I welcome the opportunity to do so, and hope that finally the truth will emerge, but I will not be party to any trial by media or discuss what I will reveal in court or any aspect of my anticipated testimony with the media.
“The law must take its course unhindered so that Zuma will finally have his day in court to answer to the nation,” Shaik told the Sunday Tribune.
Shaik is expected to become a key State witness against Zuma, who is to go on trial to fight the 16 charges of corruption, money laundering and racketeering levelled against him.
Central to the charges are 783 personal payments he allegedly received while negotiating a multibillion-dollar arms deal with, among others, multinational French arms company Thales, which has been in South Africa for more than 35 years.
The local arm of the company has been slapped with fraud and corruption charges over its dealings with Zuma involving the R2.6 billion arms contract it secured in 1997.
While Shaik was prosecuted for corruption over his involvement in Jacob Zuma at the ANC elective congress. He now faces fraud, corruption, racketeering and money-laundering charges.
the matter, Zuma escaped prosecution despite several legal challenges by the DA and an outcry by other opposition parties for him to be prosecuted.
Zuma also appeared to have finally dodged prosecution when, in 2009, the NPA said it was dropping corruption charges against him, arguing that the legal process was tainted and the chances of a successful prosecution were remote.
That decision was again challenged by the DA, resulting in a protracted legal battle with Zuma who repeatedly claimed he had done nothing wrong.
Zuma lodged an appeal with the NPA arguing why he believed the corruption charges against him should not be reinstated.
His fate was finally sealed on Friday when the NPA announced its decision to proceed with corruption charges against the former president, once dubbed “Teflon Zuma” for his ability to dodge charges and parliamentary votes of no-confidence over the years.
Shaik is likely to reveal explosive details of payments he is alleged to have made to Zuma during the arms deal.
A source close to Shaik maintained that his testimony would “sink Zuma once and for all”.
“Zuma promised him a presidential pardon in exchange for his silence. That never came. There is nothing holding him back now and it’s about time he exposed what really happened with Zuma in the arms deal.
“Shaik knows a lot and what he knows will sink Zuma, finally,” said the source.
Shaik refused to comment further, insisting he would not be drawn into the “media circus” in the coming trial against Zuma.
“I’ve served most of my time. I have two years to go. This is not about settling scores or seeking vengeance. I need to clear my name and aspects of my role at the time.
“Zuma will finally have his day in court and the truth will, I hope, finally emerge. But this should not become a trial by media. Let the law take its course,” added Shaik.
Asked to confirm whether Shaik had been approached by their unit, Hawks spokesperson Brigadier Hangwani Mulaudzi said: “We identify witnesses; our job is done. The case is now with the NPA . It’s not for me to say who the witnesses are,” said Mulaudzi.
NPA spokesperson Luvuyo Faku said: “We cannot comment on matters before court. We have to respect the rights of those involved.”